Although storytelling and human stories may be powerful in advocacy and campaigning, the participants at the event with CSOs in Brussels warned of the risk of exposing and re-traumatising persons concerned. Advocates should thus always be guided by the “do no harm principle” which implies that a risk assessment of the short and long-term effects for the individual and their community is conducted. 3.3 Strategic Litigation Definition and purpose During the project, litigation and strategic litigation in particular, were identified as a very important tool to influence change in the area of procedural rights. There is no commonly agreed definition of strategic litigation.113 However, in the framework of this project, strategic litigation can be understood as bringing a certain case to the courtroom to create broader change in society. Thus, strategic litigation is concerned not only with the specific case but also with the impact of the case on society, governments, and institutions.114 Principles and strategic use The strategic litigation expert Helen Duffy urges that lawyers need to start cases with a clear end in mind. Often lawyers only start to think about the influence of their case when it is closed. However, the impact of a case can be already controlled with the selection of a case.115 The NGO Validity (previously known as Mental Disability Advocacy Centre), for example, uses the acronym SPARR to select its cases. The SPARR selection criteria consists of Strength (Is the case a strong one?), Potential (Does the case have the potential to help other people?), Added-Value (Is the case one which can add value through expertise?), Relevance (Is the case relevant to our mission?), and Resources (Do we have the human and financial resources to litigate the case through domestic courts, and, if necessary, to a regional or international body?).116 These criteria may assist other NGOs to determine the goal and impact of the case from the start.117 After the case is selected, it is important that the lawyers become familiar with the socio-political context of the case (see above, § 2.2). Moreover, research concerning opposing opinions, deeply rooted prejudice in society, and risks linked to the case are similarly important for a realistic impact assessment. Challenges and how to overcome them Strategic litigation may also bear significant reputational, physical, mental, and financial risks. The client’s interest constitutes the starting point of the case and should not suffer for the greater cause of the case. Strategic litigation offers an opportunity to tell a relatable and personified story. This was also highlighted by the participants at the EU workshop with CSOs. However, lawyers should always be guided by the ‘do no harm principle’ which implies that a risk assessment of the short and long-term effects for the client and their community is conducted. There are discussions on whether the client’s interests and the overall impact of the case can be at odds. However, this tension can be mitigated by involving the client from the beginning, explaining the overall strategy and impact planning,118 and by giving clients the opportunity to make decisions concerning the case.119 In the context of legal aid reforms, it is often lawyers themselves that bring cases to courts lamenting the inadequate 113. Duffy, ‘Strategic Human Rights Litigation’ (2018) 3. 114. ibid 235 115. ibid 235. 116. Validity Foundation, ’What Is Strategic Litigation?’ (2011). 117. Duffy, ‘Strategic Human Rights Litigation’ (2018) 235. 118. ibid viii. 119. Power, Power and Batros, ‘Strategic Litigation Toolkit’ (Digital Freedom Fund) 41. 40