Inside Police Custody 2 clear that the governments of a number of countries in the study will have to introduce major reforms in order to comply with the requirements of the Directive on the right to legal aid, the transposition date for which is in May 2019. Some of the countries have a duty lawyer scheme and in some of those, such as Spain, they were found to be well-regulated and effective in ensuring that a lawyer is available to advise and assist detained suspects. However, particularly in those countries that do not have a duty lawyer scheme, the difficulties in identifying a lawyer willing to attend the police station was found to be frustrating and time-consuming for the police, and undermined the right of access to a lawyer for those detained suspects who either did not already know of a lawyer, or who could not afford to pay for a lawyer privately. Such difficulties meant that the police would, in some countries, seek to discourage detained suspects from exercising their right to a lawyer, or would contact their ‘preferred’ lawyers. Whilst some countries have faithfully transposed the provisions of the Directive regarding the processes by which detained suspects are informed of their right of access to a lawyer and make decisions about whether to exercise the right, others have not. In Spain, where legal assistance is mandatory, there was no evidence that the police sought to influence the decisions of suspects. However, in many other countries researchers found that suspects’ decisions to exercise their right were not recorded, police discouraged, pressurised or even instructed suspects not to ask for a lawyer, or refused to contact a lawyer when one had been requested. This was facilitated by the fact that in most of them the process lacks transparency so that it is difficult, if not impossible, for suspects or their lawyers to subsequently satisfy a court that their right of access to a lawyer had been impeded or denied. Where detained suspects were able to exercise their right to a lawyer, the ability or willingness of lawyers to actively participate, and to act in their clients’ best interests was often limited. In part, this was because of legal limitations placed on participation by lawyers, but also because lawyers in some countries either did not possess the necessary knowledge and skills, or were not able or willing, to provide competent and effective legal advice and assistance – factors that are linked to the lack of a competence threshold for membership of duty lawyer or ex officio schemes, low rates of remuneration, lack of appropriate facilities (for example, for lawyer/client consultations), and failure by the lawyers’ professional bodies to articulate the role of lawyers at the investigative stage. In a number of countries, there is a variety of limitations on the work of lawyers; limiting the time allowed for lawyer/client consultations, failing to provide confidential facilities in which they can take place, and limiting interventions that are permitted during police interrogations. It is important to note, however, that such limitations were not found in all countries. For example, in Slovenia, Poland and Lithuania, there are no limitations on the participation of lawyers during interrogations. In Spain, the Constitutional Court has spelt out an active role for lawyers during the questioning of their clients. However, in Austria limitations are placed on lawyer/client consultations during interrogations, and in a number of countries the police actively prevent lawyers from intervening whilst questioning is taking place. For example, in Spain, despite the ruling of the Constitutional Court, it was found that the police interpret the role of the lawyer as being confined to asking questions or requesting clarification only at the end of the interrogation. The research also found that, for a range of reasons, many lawyers in many of the countries, particularly legal aid or ex officio lawyers, played a very limited, passive role. This may, in part, be because acting for clients at the police station is a relatively new role, particularly when it involves advising and assisting during interrogations, and it is a role for which many lawyers are ill-equipped. The findings of the research support the need for the various quality requirements set out in Article 7 of the Directive on legal aid, and it is clear that governments and relevant authorities in many of the countries in the study have a great 54