Every person has the right to a lawyer.

First of all, there is no contradiction in this. It is possible that everyone deserves a lawyer and yet you do not want to do it, and that is also your right. Even if he is not found a lawyer at all, there is no contradiction here. He deserves it, but you also deserve it. A person can think that a person deserves the death penalty, but he himself does not want to kill him. This is if we are talking about your right not to represent him. If you talk about an obligation not to represent him (i.e. a prohibition to do so), the conflict is more head-on. And yet, this is also a possible situation. Society thinks there is an obligation to give him representation, but from your perspective, it could be an obligation on you not to do so (a command of your conscience). But this is already more problematic because of the categorical command (you wouldn’t want it to be a general law that they not represent him). But I think you are wrong in assuming that such a person should not be represented. The whole idea of ​​representation is to prevent one of two situations: 1. That an innocent person will be convicted. The representation is to make sure that he is indeed guilty and that there is no mistake here. There is no point in objecting to this, because before a trial you do not really know that he is guilty. 2. Even if it is clear to you that he is guilty (you have personal knowledge), we still do not want society to convict a person without sufficient evidence (even if he is guilty). Although the defendant will not suffer unjustified harm from such a conviction, the legal system will be damaged. We do not want to live in a society that convicts a person without evidence. Therefore, we appoint an attorney on his behalf to defend him and challenge the prosecution to ensure that it has properly met the burden of proof. [Perhaps it is part of the law that a person does not present himself as evil. He is not convicted based on his own confession, even though he is completely truthful from a factual perspective. This is of course debatable.]