Chapter vi  Equality of Arms and Rights to a Fair Hearing 141 proceedings, particularly if it is evident that a lack of legal representation by one of the parties would result in an inequality of arms (See also 6.1). 6.6.3 The right to be defended by a counsel of one’s choice In addition to self-representation, every person is entitled to legal representation by counsel of one’s own choosing, in both criminal and non-criminal proceedings.611 The OSCE participating States recognize that the right to a fair and public hearing includes the right to be represented by legal counsel of one’s choice.612 The two types of representation, self-representation and representation by counsel, are not to be considered mutually exclusive.613 Persons assisted by a lawyer have the right to instruct their lawyer on the conduct of their case, within the limits of professional responsibility, and to testify on their own behalf, therefore exercising some degree of self-representation while defended by legal counsel.614 The right of everyone charged with a criminal offence to be effectively defended by a lawyer, assigned officially if need be (See also 6.6.4), is considered by the European Court of Human Rights to be one of the fundamental features of a fair trial.615 However, the right to defend one’s case with the assistance of a counsel of one’s choice is not an absolute right and can be subject to regulations (See also 6.6.5). The right to legal representation can also be waived. When this is the case, the European Court of Human Rights requires that the waiver be established in an “unequivocal manner and be attended by minimum safeguards commensurate to its importance”.616 This also implies that before an accused can be said to have implicitly, through her/his conduct, waived the right to be defended by a counsel it must be shown that s/he could have reasonably foreseen what the consequences of this conduct would be.617 Counsel must be available at all stages of criminal proceedings, particularly in capital cases, where the Human Rights Committee has affirmed that it is axiomatic that legal representation must be made available.618 In Brown v Jamaica, for example, the Committee decided 611 See, for example, Kulov v Kyrgyzstan, HRC Communication 1369/2005, UN Doc CCPR/C/99/D/1369/2005 (2010), para 8.7. See also UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Havana, 1990, para 1. 612 Concluding Document of the Vienna Meeting, Vienna 1989, para 13.9. 613 Trial Observation Manual for Criminal Proceedings – Practitioners Guide No. 5 (Geneva: International Commission of Jurists, 2009), chapter IV para 5 (ii), page 89. 614 UN Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment 32 (2007), para 37. 615 Demebukov v Bulgaria [2008] ECHR para 50. 616 Salduz v Turkey [2008] ECHR 1542, para 59; Ananyev v Russia [2009] ECHR 1241, para 38; Poitrimol v France [1993] ECHR 62, para 31; Yoldaş v Turkey [2010] ECHR 1620, paras 51–52, in French only. 617 Ananyev v Russia [2009] ECHR 1241, para 39; Sejdovic v Italy [2006] ECHR 181, para 87 in fine. 618 Robinson v Jamaica, HRC Communication 223/1987, UN Doc CCPR/C/35/D/223/1987 (1989), para 10.4; Wright and Harvey v Jamaica, HRC Communication 459/1991, UN Doc CCPR/C/55/D/459/1991 (1995); LaVende v Trinidad and Tobago, HRC Communication 554/1993, UN Doc CCPR/C/61/D/554/1993 (1997), para 5.8; Simpson v Jamaica, HRC Communication 695/1996, UN Doc CCPR/C/73/D/695/1996 (2001); Levy v Jamaica, HRC Communication 719/1996, UN Doc CCPR/C/64/D/719/1996 (1998), para 7.1; Marshall