Skip to main content

Defence

What is the difference between legal aid, a public defender and court-appointed counsel?

They are not synonyms. Legal aid is a funding scheme, public defence is an institution, and appointment is a procedure — and a system can have any one without the others. Only some states employ the lawyers they pay for.

Fact-checkedSafety review clearedLast updated Last reviewed

In short

English-language writing uses legal aid, public defender, court-appointed counsel, assigned counsel, duty solicitor and state-funded lawyer more or less interchangeably. They describe different things, and a system can have one without any of the others.

Funding — who pays
Whether the cost falls on the accused, on public funds in whole, or on public funds in part. This is what "legal aid" usually names, and it is a question about money rather than about institutions.
Appointment — who assigns
Whether a lawyer is chosen by the accused or assigned by a court or another body, and on what trigger. This is a procedural question, and it is independent of who pays.
Employment — who the lawyer works for
Whether the lawyer is a private practitioner or an officer of a public body. This is the question the term "public defender" implies an answer to, and it is the one most often assumed rather than checked.

Why it exists

AnalysisEvery system that takes defence seriously faces the same problem: a right to a lawyer is worthless to a person who cannot obtain one. The three questions above are the components of every answer, and states have combined them in genuinely different ways rather than converging on a model.

How it works

Appointment without employment — Germany
Section 140 of the Code of Criminal Procedure defines the cases of necessary defence, and section 141 governs when a Pflichtverteidiger is appointed — without delay on request after instruction, and independently of any request in defined situations including detention. The lawyer appointed is a Rechtsanwalt: a member of the private legal profession, assigned to the case. Germany has an appointment scheme and no defence institution.
Funding without employment — France
Aide juridictionnelle is granted on conditions including that resources not exceed the admission ceilings, and the State then takes charge of all or part of the costs and of the avocat’s fees. The avocat is a private practitioner. France has a funding scheme and no defence institution.
A constitutional institution — Brazil
Article 134 makes the Defensoria Pública a permanent institution essential to the jurisdictional function of the State. Its members hold career posts filled at the initial class by public competitive examination, are guaranteed inamovibilidade, and are FORBIDDEN to practise privately. Brazil is the case in this corpus where funding, appointment and employment are all coupled — and it is coupled at constitutional level, not administratively.
Locally organised and locally varied — the United States
This corpus establishes for prosecution that the United States organises the function separately in each state, with titles and selection methods varying by state and no national standard. The same caution applies to defence: there is no single national model, and this wave did not research any state’s arrangements. The public defender office is one American arrangement among several, not a description of the country.

The Brazilian arrangement is worth stating carefully, because its shape is unusual. Article 134 gives the Defensoria Pública a remit far wider than criminal defence: legal guidance, the promotion of human rights, and the defence of individual and collective rights, judicial and extrajudicial, in all degrees, integrally and free, to those in need. The constitutional formula describing it — a permanent institution essential to the jurisdictional function of the State — is the same one Article 127 uses for the Ministério Público.

Common misconceptions

Widely held beliefs that do not match how the system actually operates.

  • Common belief: Legal aid and public defenders are the same thing.

    In practice: France operates a means-tested funding scheme paying private lawyers, with no defence institution. Brazil operates a constitutional institution employing career defenders. Germany operates an appointment scheme that is neither. Three different arrangements, and only one of them is a public defence institution.

  • Common belief: A court-appointed lawyer works for the government.

    In practice: Germany’s Pflichtverteidiger and France’s aided avocat are private practitioners. Appointment assigns a lawyer to a case; it does not employ them.

  • Common belief: Brazil’s Defensoria Pública is Brazil’s public defender office.

    In practice: It is a permanent constitutional institution with the standing Article 134 gives it, a mandate covering the promotion of human rights and collective and extrajudicial matters, members holding irremovability, and a bar on private practice. A public defender office provides criminal defence to indigent defendants. The shared function conceals a difference in kind.

  • Common belief: Publicly funded defence means the state controls the defence.

    In practice: Nothing in the provisions reached here supports that, and the arrangements cut against it: two of the three systems pay or appoint private practitioners, and the third gives its defenders irremovability and forbids them other employment. Whether funding affects independence in practice is an empirical question this wave did not research and does not answer.

  • Common belief: Every country has a public defence institution.

    In practice: Germany and France do not. They have a statutory appointment scheme and a funding scheme respectively, both operating through the private profession.

How this varies between jurisdictions

A required section on every guide. Arrangements differ between countries, and we say how.

Setting the three components side by side shows how little they move together.

Germany
Appointment: statutory, triggered by the situation under section 140. Employment: private. Institution: none.
France
Funding: means-tested and graduated, covering all or part. Employment: private. Institution: none.
Brazil
Funding: constitutional, on proof of insufficient resources. Employment: career officers of the institution, barred from private practice. Institution: constitutional, with a remit beyond criminal defence.

AnalysisA vocabulary that treats these as three names for one thing cannot express the differences, which is why this site uses each country’s own terms and explains them rather than translating them.

Rights and accountability

AnalysisEach arrangement carries a different question about independence. Where the state pays a private lawyer, the question is whether the payment is adequate and whether it is conditioned. Where the state employs the defender, the question is what protects them — which is why Brazil’s guarantee of irremovability and its bar on private practice are constitutional rather than administrative provisions.

What we could not establish

  • Three systems were reached from primary sources — Germany, Brazil and France. Canada, Australia, Ireland, Japan, Spain, Switzerland and the United States were not researched for this wave, and their arrangements are not described.
  • This page describes how representation is organised and paid for. It states no eligibility rule, no financial threshold and no application procedure, and it is not a guide to obtaining representation.
  • Nothing here establishes that any arrangement works well, is adequately funded, or produces better outcomes than another.

Where to go next

Related: the right to counsel, what defence counsel does, and Brazil.

Where this connects

Institutions: Prosecution service.

Sources

  1. Strafprozessordnung (StPO) § 140 — Notwendige Verteidigung

    Bundesministerium der Justiz / Bundesamt für Justiz (Gesetze im Internet) · Legislation · link verified 2026-08-26

    The authoritative German text, read directly. Supports that § 140(1) enumerates the situations constituting a case of necessary defence, including where the first-instance trial is expected before the Oberlandesgericht, Landgericht or Schöffengericht; where a Verbrechen is charged; where the proceedings may lead to a professional ban; where the accused is to be brought before a court on detention or provisional placement; where he is held in an institution by judicial order or with judicial permission; where placement for a psychiatric assessment is in question; and further defined cases. Cited for the central comparative fact that the German trigger is the SERIOUSNESS OF THE MATTER AND THE ACCUSED'S SITUATION, not the accused's means. It establishes no means test, and it is not evidence about any other system.

  2. Strafprozessordnung (StPO) § 141 — Zeitpunkt der Bestellung eines Pflichtverteidigers

    Bundesministerium der Justiz / Bundesamt für Justiz (Gesetze im Internet) · Legislation · link verified 2026-08-26

    The authoritative German text, read directly. Supports § 141(1): in cases of necessary defence, a Pflichtverteidiger is appointed without delay ("unverzüglich") to an accused who has been informed of the allegation and has no counsel, where he expressly requests it after instruction, and the request is to be decided at the latest before any questioning of the accused or confrontation with him. And § 141(2): appointment occurs INDEPENDENTLY OF ANY REQUEST once he is to be brought before a court on detention or provisional placement, once it becomes known he is held in an institution, where it is apparent in the preliminary proceedings that he cannot defend himself, or where he has been called on to respond to the indictment. Cited for the timing and mechanics of APPOINTMENT. The provision concerns appointment, not employment: the appointed defender is a Rechtsanwalt, and nothing here supports describing a Pflichtverteidiger as a state employee or as a public defender in the United States sense.

  3. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988

    Presidência da República — Casa Civil (Planalto) · Legislation · 1988-10-05 · link verified 2026-07-25

    The authoritative Portuguese text, read in full. THE backbone of the Brazil pages. Supports: the federation of the Union, the States, the Federal District and the Municipalities, 'todos autônomos' (Art. 18; Art. 1); separation of powers (Art. 2); the criminal-justice guarantees of Art. 5 — devido processo legal (LIV), contraditório e ampla defesa (LV), presumption of innocence 'ninguém será considerado culpado até o trânsito em julgado de sentença penal condenatória' (LVII), and habeas corpus (LXVIII); that penal and procedural law are the EXCLUSIVE (privativa) competence of the Union (Art. 22, I) while direito penitenciário is CONCURRENT (Art. 24, I) and the States hold the reserved/residual competences (Art. 25 §1); public security through the six órgãos of Art. 144 (I polícia federal; II rodoviária federal; III ferroviária federal; IV polícias civis; V polícias militares e corpos de bombeiros militares; VI polícias penais, added by EC 104/2019), with the polícias civis 'dirigidas por delegados de polícia de carreira' exercising 'as funções de polícia judiciária e a apuração de infrações penais, exceto as militares' (§4), the polícias militares holding 'a polícia ostensiva e a preservação da ordem pública' (§5), and both subordinate to the Governors (§6); the Judiciary organs of Art. 92 (STF, CNJ, STJ, TST, TRFs/Juízes Federais, and the labour, electoral, military and state courts), the STF as guardian of the Constitution (Art. 102), the CNJ (Art. 103-B) and state justice (Art. 125); the Ministério Público as 'instituição permanente, essencial à função jurisdicional do Estado' defending 'a ordem jurídica, o regime democrático e os interesses sociais e individuais indisponíveis', with autonomy and the principles of unidade, indivisibilidade e independência funcional (Art. 127), its structure MPU (MPF/MPT/MPM/MPDFT) + MPE (Art. 128), its functions including promoting 'privativamente, a ação penal pública' (Art. 129 I) and the inquérito civil / ação civil pública for interesses difusos e coletivos (Art. 129 III), and the CNMP (Art. 130-A); and that the Union organizes and maintains the Judiciary, Ministério Público and police of the Federal District (Art. 21, XIII–XIV). The Portuguese text alone has legal effect. WAVE 12 ADDITION, further clauses of Art. 5 read directly from the same Planalto text: XXXV a lei não excluirá da apreciação do Poder Judiciário lesão ou ameaça a direito; XXXVI the law shall not impair a vested right, a perfect juridical act or res judicata; XXXVII não haverá juízo ou tribunal de exceção; XXXIX não há crime sem lei anterior que o defina, nem pena sem prévia cominação legal; XL a lei penal não retroagirá, salvo para beneficiar o réu; LVI evidence obtained by unlawful means is inadmissible in the process; LXXV the State shall indemnify a person convicted by judicial error and one held beyond the term fixed in the sentence; LXXVIII reasonable duration of proceedings and the means guaranteeing the speed of their handling, in the judicial and administrative spheres. WAVE 14 ADDITION, further provisions read directly from the same Planalto text: Art. 5º LXXIV “o Estado prestará assistência jurídica integral e gratuita aos que comprovarem insuficiência de recursos”; Art. 5º LXXVI that civil birth registration and the death certificate are free, in the form of the law, for the recognisedly poor; Art. 5º LXXVII that actions of habeas corpus and habeas data are free, as are, in the form of the law, the acts necessary to the exercise of citizenship; Art. 103-B § 4º that the Conselho Nacional de Justiça has competence for “o controle da atuação administrativa e financeira do Poder Judiciário e do cumprimento dos deveres funcionais dos juízes”, including safeguarding the autonomy of the Judiciary and issuing regulatory acts (I), reviewing the legality of administrative acts of members or organs of the Judiciary and annulling, revising or setting a period for compliance (II), and receiving complaints against members or organs of the Judiciary including its auxiliary services and delegated notarial and registry services, taking over disciplinary proceedings in course and ordering removal, availability or retirement and applying other administrative sanctions (III); Art. 133 “O advogado é indispensável à administração da justiça, sendo inviolável por seus atos e manifestações no exercício da profissão, nos limites da lei”; and Art. 134 in its current wording, that the Defensoria Pública is a permanent institution essential to the jurisdictional function of the State, incumbent on it, as an expression and instrument of the democratic regime, fundamentally to provide legal guidance, the promotion of human rights and the defence, in all degrees, judicial and extrajudicial, of the individual and collective rights of the needy. WAVE 20 ADDITION. Read from the same Planalto text. Brazil states its emergency architecture as a closed system: two regimes, an exhaustive list of measures for each, and an express preservation of liability afterwards. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136, caput: “Art. 136. O Presidente da República pode, ouvidos o Conselho da República e o Conselho de Defesa Nacional, decretar estado de defesa para preservar ou prontamente restabelecer, em locais restritos e determinados, a ordem pública ou a paz social ameaçadas por grave e iminente instabilidade institucional ou atingidas por calamidades de grandes proporções na natureza.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 § 2º, added after adversarial review found this platform quoting it from a record that did not carry it, and re-verified against the Planalto text: “§ 2º O tempo de duração do estado de defesa não será superior a trinta dias, podendo ser prorrogado uma vez, por igual período, se persistirem as razões que justificaram a sua decretação.” Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 §1º, I–II: “I - restrições aos direitos de: a) reunião, ainda que exercida no seio das associações; b) sigilo de correspondência; c) sigilo de comunicação telegráfica e telefônica; II - ocupação e uso temporário de bens e serviços públicos, na hipótese de calamidade pública, respondendo a União pelos danos e custos decorrentes.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 §3º, I–IV: “§ 3º Na vigência do estado de defesa: I - a prisão por crime contra o Estado, determinada pelo executor da medida, será por este comunicada imediatamente ao juiz competente, que a relaxará, se não for legal, facultado ao preso requerer exame de corpo de delito à autoridade policial; II - a comunicação será acompanhada de declaração, pela autoridade, do estado físico e mental do detido no momento de sua autuação; III - a prisão ou detenção de qualquer pessoa não poderá ser superior a dez dias, salvo quando autorizada pelo Poder Judiciário; IV - é vedada a incomunicabilidade do preso.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 136 §§4º–7º: “§ 4º Decretado o estado de defesa ou sua prorrogação, o Presidente da República, dentro de vinte e quatro horas, submeterá o ato com a respectiva justificação ao Congresso Nacional, que decidirá por maioria absoluta. § 5º Se o Congresso Nacional estiver em recesso, será convocado, extraordinariamente, no prazo de cinco dias. § 6º O Congresso Nacional apreciará o decreto dentro de dez dias contados de seu recebimento, devendo continuar funcionando enquanto vigorar o estado de defesa. § 7º Rejeitado o decreto, cessa imediatamente o estado de defesa.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 138, caput: “Art. 138. O decreto do estado de sítio indicará sua duração, as normas necessárias a sua execução e as garantias constitucionais que ficarão suspensas, e, depois de publicado, o Presidente da República designará o executor das medidas específicas e as áreas abrangidas.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 139: “Art. 139. Na vigência do estado de sítio decretado com fundamento no art. 137, I, só poderão ser tomadas contra as pessoas as seguintes medidas: I - obrigação de permanência em localidade determinada; II - detenção em edifício não destinado a acusados ou condenados por crimes comuns; III - restrições relativas à inviolabilidade da correspondência, ao sigilo das comunicações, à prestação de informações e à liberdade de imprensa, radiodifusão e televisão, na forma da lei; IV - suspensão da liberdade de reunião; V - busca e apreensão em domicílio; VI - intervenção nas empresas de serviços públicos; VII - requisição de bens. Parágrafo único. Não se inclui nas restrições do inciso III a difusão de pronunciamentos de parlamentares efetuados em suas Casas Legislativas, desde que liberada pela respectiva Mesa.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 141 and parágrafo único: “Art. 141. Cessado o estado de defesa ou o estado de sítio, cessarão também seus efeitos, sem prejuízo da responsabilidade pelos ilícitos cometidos por seus executores ou agentes. Parágrafo único. Logo que cesse o estado de defesa ou o estado de sítio, as medidas aplicadas em sua vigência serão relatadas pelo Presidente da República, em mensagem ao Congresso Nacional, com especificação e justificação das providências adotadas, com relação nominal dos atingidos e indicação das restrições aplicadas.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 60 §§1º and 4º: “§ 1º A Constituição não poderá ser emendada na vigência de intervenção federal, de estado de defesa ou de estado de sítio. […] § 4º Não será objeto de deliberação a proposta de emenda tendente a abolir: I - a forma federativa de Estado; II - o voto direto, secreto, universal e periódico; III - a separação dos Poderes; IV - os direitos e garantias individuais.”. Supports Constituição de 1988, Art. 142, caput and §1º: “Art. 142. As Forças Armadas, constituídas pela Marinha, pelo Exército e pela Aeronáutica, são instituições nacionais permanentes e regulares, organizadas com base na hierarquia e na disciplina, sob a autoridade suprema do Presidente da República, e destinam-se à defesa da Pátria, à garantia dos poderes constitucionais e, por iniciativa de qualquer destes, da lei e da ordem. § 1º Lei complementar estabelecerá as normas gerais a serem adotadas na organização, no preparo e no emprego das Forças Armadas.”. Cited for the closed lists of permitted measures, the immediate judicial communication of an arrest, the congressional role, the express preservation of liability for unlawful acts after the regime ends, and the bar on amending the Constitution while one is in force. It records no declaration of either regime and supports no claim about any other country.WAVE 21 ADDITION. Article 5 read incisum by incisum from the same Planalto consolidated text. Supports the caput, and specifically its rights-holder scope: “Todos são iguais perante a lei, sem distinção de qualquer natureza, garantindo-se aos brasileiros e aos estrangeiros residentes no País a inviolabilidade do direito à vida, à liberdade, à igualdade, à segurança e à propriedade, nos termos seguintes”. Supports Art. 5º X: “são invioláveis a intimidade, a vida privada, a honra e a imagem das pessoas, assegurado o direito a indenização pelo dano material ou moral decorrente de sua violação”. Supports Art. 5º XI: “a casa é asilo inviolável do indivíduo, ninguém nela podendo penetrar sem consentimento do morador, salvo em caso de flagrante delito ou desastre, ou para prestar socorro, ou, durante o dia, por determinação judicial” — note that judicial authorisation is textually confined to daytime, which is the narrowest such qualifier found in this wave. Supports Art. 5º XII: “é inviolável o sigilo da correspondência e das comunicações telegráficas, de dados e das comunicações telefônicas, salvo, no último caso, por ordem judicial, nas hipóteses e na forma que a lei estabelecer para fins de investigação criminal ou instrução processual penal” — the exception reaches the LAST-NAMED category only, requires a judicial order, and is confined to criminal investigation or criminal procedural instruction. Supports Art. 5º LIV (“ninguém será privado da liberdade ou de seus bens sem o devido processo legal”), LV (contraditório and ampla defesa in judicial and administrative proceedings), LVI (“são inadmissíveis, no processo, as provas obtidas por meios ilícitos”) and LVII. Supports Art. 5º LXI: “ninguém será preso senão em flagrante delito ou por ordem escrita e fundamentada de autoridade judiciária competente, salvo nos casos de transgressão militar ou crime propriamente militar, definidos em lei”. Supports LXII (arrest and place of custody communicated immediately to the competent judge and to the family or a person indicated). Supports LXIII: “o preso será informado de seus direitos, entre os quais o de permanecer calado, sendo-lhe assegurada a assistência da família e de advogado” — a constitutional notification duty coupled with a silence right, and worded for “o preso”. Supports LXIV, LXV (“a prisão ilegal será imediatamente relaxada pela autoridade judiciária”) and LXVI. Supports § 1º (“As normas definidoras dos direitos e garantias fundamentais têm aplicação imediata”), § 2º (rights expressed in the Constitution do not exclude others deriving from the regime and principles it adopts, or from international treaties to which Brazil is party) and § 3º (“Os tratados e convenções internacionais sobre direitos humanos que forem aprovados, em cada Casa do Congresso Nacional, em dois turnos, por três quintos dos votos dos respectivos membros, serão equivalentes às emendas constitucionais”, added by Emenda Constitucional nº 45 de 2004). VERIFIED NEGATIVE: Article 5 contains no general limitation clause of the Canadian, South African, Kenyan or Swiss kind; limits appear inside individual incisos. Constitutional text only — no decision of the Supremo Tribunal Federal, no statute, nothing about any other country.

  4. Sobre o Ministério Público da União — Institucional

    Ministério Público da União (MPU) · Institutional (self-description) · link verified 2026-07-25

    The MPU's own institutional page, read in full. Supports that the Ministério Público da União comprises 'os seguintes ramos: a) O Ministério Público Federal (MPF); b) O Ministério Público do Trabalho (MPT); c) O Ministério Público Militar (MPM); d) O Ministério Público do Distrito Federal e Territórios (MPDFT)', that alongside it stand 'os Ministérios Públicos dos Estados', and that 'ao MPU é assegurada autonomia funcional, administrativa e financeira'. Confirms the MP's federative structure and autonomy in the institution's own words.

  5. Aide juridictionnelle — conditions et démarches (service-public.fr)

    Direction de l’information légale et administrative (Premier ministre), service-public.fr · Government publication · link verified 2026-08-26

    The French government’s official public-information service, read directly in French. Supports that where a person must assert their rights in court but lacks the financial resources, the State takes charge of "tout ou partie" — all or part — of their legal costs and of their AVOCAT'S FEES; that aid is granted on three conditions relating to nationality or habitual residence, to the costs not being covered by insurance, and to resources not exceeding the admission ceilings; that the amount varies with the applicant's reference tax income and household size; and that the habitual-residence condition does not apply to minors, to beneficiaries of a protection order, or to persons involved in criminal proceedings. Cited for the fact that French publicly funded defence is MEANS-TESTED, GRADUATED, AND PAYS A PRIVATE PRACTITIONER. It does not establish the underlying procedural right to counsel in French criminal procedure, which was not researched, and it supports no claim about any other country. The specific financial ceilings are deliberately not reproduced, as they change.

  6. Prosecution (National Census of State Court Prosecutors)

    Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice · Government publication · link verified 2026-07-24

    Supports that the chief state-court prosecutor is 'also referred to as the district attorney, county attorney, commonwealth attorney, or state's attorney', represents the state in criminal cases, serves in the executive branch of state government, is 'answerable to the public as an elected or appointed public official', and is afforded broad charging discretion. Supports that local prosecution titles and selection methods VARY and are not uniformly 'district attorney'. Does NOT support a figure for how many are elected versus appointed.

  7. Public Defender of Rights (Veřejný ochránce práv / Ombudsman)

    Kancelář veřejného ochránce práv (Czech Republic) · Government publication · link verified 2026-07-26

    The Public Defender of Rights' own English site, read directly. Supports that the Ombudsman (Veřejný ochránce práv, based in Brno) handles complaints against the conduct or inaction of public authorities, conducts inspections of places where persons are deprived of liberty (prisons, detention, psychiatric hospitals, social-care homes), and acts as the national equality/anti-discrimination body under the Anti-Discrimination Act.