The 75th German Jurist Day (djt) has urged the collection of more data on legal training, a step supported by legal scholar Lars Knobbe-Springorum. He argues that modest actions could improve the traineeship without waiting for a full overhaul.
Calls for quick fixes
During a panel at the University of Speyer, Stefanie Otte, head of the djt’s training department and president of the Higher Regional Court of Celle, outlined several concrete wishes: a maximum three-month wait for a placement, the ability to live on the maintenance allowance, a dedicated workspace in the court and reliable equipment. None of these items were adopted as formal decisions.
The djt created a dedicated training division in 1998, and the same questions still surface. In Erfurt, roughly 32 percent of the 2,000 participants were law students or trainees, reflecting both the persistent challenges of the system and the high level of engagement from those directly affected. The focus remains on what can be achieved within the existing framework, rather than waiting for systemic overhaul.
Evidence gaps in legal training
Professor Julian Krüper of Ruhr University Bochum highlighted in a full report that the scarcity of empirical data forces policymakers to rely on anecdotal evidence. He stresses that without solid statistics, reforms risk being disconnected from reality.
Krüper recommends mandatory station evaluations and a stronger empirical foundation for any reforms the djt proposes. The report points out that responsibilities for gathering data remain vague, with no clear assignment of who should collect and analyze information at the local level. This ambiguity risks leaving critical gaps in understanding how well the system functions.
Read Also: Otmar Kury Testifies in Block Trial Amid Tensions
The federal ministry’s standing commission on legal education is seen as insufficient. Data should also be gathered in university classrooms, training offices, and concerning state examinations, according to the analysis. Krüper emphasizes that without concrete data, discussions about reform remain speculative, as the current system lacks objective benchmarks for success or failure.
Krüper warned, “Deficits are always blamed on the student, never on the training.” This criticism shows the need for systematic evidence rather than isolated complaints. The lack of empirical grounding means that systemic issues—such as uneven resource distribution or inconsistent training standards—are often overlooked in favor of individual accountability.
Stress and support in the traineeship
While exam grades are publicly known, the personal cost of achieving them is not. Psychologist-lawyer Alica Mohnert received strong applause for stating that “the entire law curriculum is stressful, and the final year before the exam is pathological.”
The same pressure extends into the traineeship, where exam preparation begins on day one. Otte’s proposed measures, such as guaranteeing a workspace and functional devices from the start, could alleviate immediate burdens without awaiting large-scale studies. These small but tangible improvements, such as ensuring reliable technology and dedicated workspaces, would directly address the daily frustrations that accumulate during the traineeship.
Funding remains a critical hurdle. A resolution passed without dissent urges the Länder to provide adequate financing for law faculties and the preparatory service, acknowledging that many of the suggested measures depend on financial support. Without sufficient resources, even well-intentioned proposals, such as standardized training materials or mental health initiatives, risk remaining unfulfilled.
Read Also: Former Transport Minister Scheuer Goes on Trial
Funding and uniform resources
The djt also called for nationwide uniform teaching materials for practical training and second-state-exam preparation. The proposal raises the question of which body should oversee the creation and distribution of these resources.
This demand was the sole decision adopted without any opposing votes or abstentions, indicating broad consensus on the need for standardized content. The inconsistency of materials across regions, even within the same federal state, creates unequal preparation conditions for trainees, undermining fairness in the exam process.
One suggestion is to task the examination offices with supplying comparable materials, sample exams, and official solution outlines. Such involvement would not blur the line between training and assessment but would ensure consistent preparation conditions. Currently, trainees rely on disparate resources, some of which may be outdated or incomplete, further exacerbating the stress of exam preparation.
Former trainee Lars Knobbe-Springorum asserts that even modest structural adjustments can significantly ease the workload for current interns. He cautions that the next data collection round should not become another waiting period. Secure financial backing, a serious approach to mental-health issues, and up-to-date work tools are essential components that can be introduced now, irrespective of any pending full reform.
