The Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA) entered the "Memorandum between the German Federal Bar and the Japan Federation of Bar Associations on Strengthening Legal Exchange and Friendly Co-Operation" (MOU) on June 24, 2008.

Commemorating the conclusion of the MOU, the seminar on honorary judges, in other words, lay judges, in the German criminal justice system was held on the same day and Mr. Axel C. Filges, President of the German Federal Bar (Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer; "BRAK"), and other BRAK officers delivered lectures from the perspective of criminal defense counsel.

They first stated that the participation of lay judges in criminal trials was essential to institutionalize the principles of democracy, and then outlined the lay judge system and its related controversial points, including:
- how lay judges are selected, including nomination by local political parties;
- composition of a panel and the term of lay judges (five years);
- principles of direct examination of witnesses and evidence and oral testimony at trial and thus lay judges should not have a right to examine documents; and
- no conviction may be rendered against opinions of lay judges.

A participant mentioned that a lay judge in another country with whom she spoke told that he did not say anything in the trial because of his lack of understanding, and asked whether there were any measures taken to make up for the lack of knowledge of lay judges. In response, BRAK gave an impressive explanation that "providing legal information to lay judges to fill the knowledge gap between lay judges and professional ones is out of the original purposes of the system. Lay judges are actually passive in trial. Their attendance at trial, however, works as a control mechanism and professional judges rule cases with determining whether their judgments could be acceptable for lay judges."