Lawyers’ teams There is evidence to support the view that a team approach is one of the most successful ways to help lawyers go “above and beyond” in capital cases. ABA Guidelines established minimum performance standards for lawyers taking death penalty cases in the United States. Experts have agreed that the promotion, under the guidelines, of legal teams, which can bring a range of experience and expertise to life and death cases, has brought about the most improvement. The use of legal teams in death penalty cases in Asia appears to be limited. In interviews conducted by TAEDP, Taiwanese lawyers reported that death penalty cases were complex, requiring special attention to the sentencing phase. They felt that without a group of lawyers the workload would be overwhelming and it would be difficult to provide an effective defence. The lawyers also felt it would difficult to achieve equality of arms between the defendant and the prosecution team. The existence of a team would also affect the lawyer’s willingness to take on the case. In Taiwan, teams also provide an opportunity for experienced lawyers to pass on their knowledge and skills to those representing capital cases for the first time. In China, wealthy clients may be able to hire a team of lawyers to help at every stage of a death penalty case and offer compensation to victims. However, indigent defendants will not benefit from such a range of experience and can only hope that their legal aid lawyer is motivated. There is a lack of professional training for lawyers across Asia specifically on the death penalty. However, in some countries civil society organisations fill a gap where official providers fall short. Training Our survey asked researchers to explore the provision of post-qualification training. With defence lawyers expected to go “above and beyond” in death penalty cases there is a need for death penalty specific training. Researchers, however, found that, across Asia, there is a lack of professional training for lawyers focussing on the death penalty. Death penalty specific training is most likely to be unavailable in countries where the death penalty is very rare and lawyers see little need to spend time developing such skills. In some countries, civil society organisations help to fill a gap where the profession or official providers fall short. In China, where there is little space for an independent civil society to advocate on criminal justice and human rights, the provision of additional training is far more difficult. JPP argues that in Pakistan, despite the establishment of the Pakistan Bar Council and the Provincial Bar Councils in 1973, there is a lack of ongoing professional and ethical training for lawyers. Some lawyers surveyed report that the Punjab Bar Council holds training sessions occasionally. However, the fact that most lawyers are not aware of these training sessions reflects failure on the part of the Bar Councils who are responsible for their members. In the absence of training provided by the Bar, NGOs have tried to fill the gap. 18