Between strategy and abuse – the limits of the right to formal defense and the disciplinary liability of a lawyer

The aim of this article is to define the limits of a defense attorney's exercise of the right to defense in criminal proceedings, with particular emphasis on the obligation to act to the benefit of the accused. The main research problem is to determine whether fulfilling this obligation entitles the defense attorney to use all procedural means leading to a favorable outcome, or whether it is subject to limitations arising from procedural norms and principles of attorney ethics. The article is based on a dogmatic legal approach, encompassing an analysis of regulations, doctrine, and case law. The considerations lead to the conclusion that the right to defense is not absolute, and its instrumental use may be classified as abuse, justifying the attorney's disciplinary liability. These findings have both theoretical significance, clarifying the concept of abuse of the right to defense, and practical significance, indicating the limits of permissible defense strategies.