“Of the legal disciplines, sanctions legislation has become the most relevant”
Roman, graduate of Moscow State University
I, like many, went to law school because of my status: neither the history, nor political science, nor philosophy departments seemed to me promising in terms of a career. Plus, my parents are lawyers, and I understood such a professional path. I wanted to get a job in some large international company, because there is an opportunity not only to travel the world, but also to achieve maximum career heights. Now he got a job in an investment fund that serves the interests of one big businessman.
When the Constitution was amended, everyone around me was, to put it mildly, in shock: it was obvious that this was a purely political decision. At the same time, two of our honored teachers, Suren Adibekovich Avakyan and Mikhail Nikolayevich Marchenko, were members of the working group for the preparation of these amendments. The faculty arranged a meeting with them, students were given the opportunity to ask questions. Avakyan and Marchenko responded superficially and in every possible way showed their loyalty to the authorities. And the teachers of the younger generation, in informal conversations, made it clear to us that they consider the amendments to be violence against constitutional law, and were very ironic about this. I remember one associate professor of the department of constitutional law conveyed to us his conversation with the professor. He complained: what, they say, now teach children? To this, the associate professor replied with irony: "Well, we still have the constitutional law of foreign countries."
Young teachers let us know that they consider the amendments to be a violation of constitutional law
After February 24, signatures against the war began to be collected at the faculty. And one junior teacher, who was much loved by all students and known for his oppositional views, published an Instagram post criticizing the war. He was called to the carpet by the head of the department, after which the young teacher quit. Among the students there was a recording of the seminar of this professor, at which he explained that the university should be out of politics. By the way, in some monograph, the same professor gave legal arguments why the annexation of Crimea is legal. The dismissed teacher, as far as I know, is now not working anywhere and is engaged in tutoring.
But the most interesting thing was in our military training classes. Officers with the rank of colonel and lieutenant colonel teach there, and it is clear what their views are. At the first lesson after February 24, we were informed that there would be an additional class, at which the leadership of the military department would speak. The deputy head of the department came, at first he said something about countering corruption at the faculty, and then he moved on to a “special military operation”.
I started with the fact that military personnel are obliged to show patriotism and support the policy of the state, and this requirement also applies to us. He quoted the president's words that all this is justified, "we did not start this war, but we are ending it," and recommended that this position be adhered to when discussing this issue. And, of course, he said that in Ukraine “the ideology of Nazism is supported at the state level”, biological weapons are being developed and that there is not a single one of our conscripts there, but only contract soldiers <the insider has an audio recording of this lecture> . He then played a video of Putin's speech on a big screen and left the audience. When the president finished his speech, we all applauded, my friend shouted "Hurrah!" All this with sarcasm, of course. And after that, before each lesson at the military department, we were given five minutes of political information: they included either some pro-government YouTube blogger, or news from federal channels.
Before each lesson at the military department, we were given five minutes of political information
As for future prospects, I would like to work on the international legal profile. I think the most optimal career track for me is the study of the sanctions legislation of foreign countries. So if nothing changes in the near future, I will specialize in this.
“Lawyers must be able to adapt”
Daria, student
I finally decided on the choice of profession in the ninth grade. This year I became the winner of the All-Russian Olympiad for schoolchildren in law, which guaranteed me admission to the law faculty of any university. I am not a fighter for justice and not a defender of the weak. I am a person who can calculate many options, absorbs new information with interest and knows how to apply it in practice. Recently, it has become entertainment for me to go to the Pravo.ru website and read the plots of various court cases. Of course, high-profile trials, especially those involving famous personalities, attract my attention. I think a lot of people wanted to be divorce lawyers after Johnny Depp. As for amendments to the Constitution and new laws, I don't look at them on purpose. But my subscriptions in social networks allow me to keep abreast of everything new in the legal world. I do not think that the conditions for the professional activity of lawyers in Russia have somehow worsened. Times change, circumstances change. Lawyers must be able to quickly adapt to them and adjust their plans.
“The teachers directly said that what we study is now depreciating”
Anton, a graduate of the Financial University under the Government of Russia
I have always liked humanitarian subjects: law, social studies, economics. My grandfather was a lawyer, and I wanted to fight for the ideas of goodness and justice, so, vacillating between political science and jurisprudence, I chose jurisprudence. In my first year, I thought about becoming a lawyer in the field of public law and even working in government bodies, but closer to the end of my studies, I realized that civil law fascinates me more. Now I work for a consulting company that changed its name after a foreign brand left Russia.
In my undergraduate years, I didn’t really pay attention to the agenda and was sure that the fundamentals of the legislation did not change – yes, very nasty laws were introduced, but this could then be somehow excluded and corrected. The moment that changed everything for me was the amendment of the Constitution. Coincidentally, they were announced literally the day before my constitutional law exam, and, of course, this greatly influenced my attitude towards the legal system.
The moment that changed everything for me was the amendment of the Constitution
Teachers reacted differently to what was happening. Most did not express their position in any way and tried to avoid such topics, but there were those who carefully discussed them with us in pairs. Such teachers tried not just to say that it was bad, but to analyze and explain why it was bad. For example, when we discussed the provision that the decisions of international bodies – for example, the ECtHR – may now not be recognized in Russia, their main message was this: what we are now studying is depreciating, and our career prospects in international law are becoming more illusory , because the Russian practice will obviously degrade from this, and for foreign organizations we will cease to be valuable specialists.
At first, we didn’t touch upon the topic of the war, and at first there was a strong dissonance: you understand that everything will definitely not be the same as before, and the teachers either do not realize this, or do not want to show that they are aware. But then they still had to talk about it, also very carefully. For example, in the discipline related to transnational corporations, we analyzed Shell, and the teacher, of course, could not help but say that Shell was going to sell its Russian assets. But he simply stated this without giving any assessments.
Most of my classmates did not support either the change in the Constitution or the war – they said that all this is absolutely illegal and terrible. At work, too, everyone understood what was happening from the very beginning, and it was very pleasant to be in such a team.
If I had worked in the field of public law, I would probably have been completely disappointed in the profession. But legal consulting will remain in any case, so I will continue to work for the business that still exists in the country, although it is clear that the economy is going through hard times.
“I want to work in a company in the energy sector”
Anna, student
Since September, I began to intensively study law, participate in competitions and felt that jurisprudence is mine. I'm going to apply to Moscow State University or MGIMO. I would like to study international law and get into the Arabic language group, so that later I can get a job in some energy company – Russian or foreign. Definitely, I would not want to work in administrative and criminal proceedings, I am not at all interested in this.
And in the future, perhaps, she would not mind engaging in legislative activities. I am closely following what is happening in Russian legislation, and I want to start somehow changing this system. Legislation needs to be improved, it has a lot of outdated norms, misunderstandings, various conflicts – this should not happen, attempts to interpret the law in different ways must be stopped.
I closely follow what is happening in Russian legislation, and I want to change this system
I understand that the political situation in the country is not easy, but this does not scare me: as you know, difficult times give rise to strong personalities. Nothing will lie in ruins – a new system will be built, and I want to participate in this. I think that everything will be fine with us.
“In the field of public law, we are in chaos, but so far nothing threatens corporate law”
Kirill, graduate of the Higher School of Economics
I entered HSE following the results of the All-Russian Olympiad for schoolchildren, and I graduated from the Master's program in the Corporate Lawyer program. I have already changed several companies, now I work in a Moscow law office.
Our teaching corps is divided into two main categories. The first group consists of classical university professors with long experience, focused more on the academic discussion of the subject than on the social setting in which it can be applied. With such teachers, there was no discussion of the situation at all. And the second category is young professionals, graduate students or visiting professors, and we discussed all this with them both in the classroom and in the framework of informal communication. Of course, there was a lot of criticism.
In the sphere of public law, we certainly have chaos, and there is no need to talk about the effective work of lawyers and the protection of rights. I am not very immersed in how criminal trials go, but from the available materials I understand that it is very difficult to work as criminal lawyers today. It is, of course, difficult to observe all this purely humanly: there is simply no rational explanation for many novelties in administrative and criminal legislation. Equality and justice should be glorified in law, but it turns out quite differently: the law does not protect me as a citizen.
In the private sphere, due to the very indirect interest of the state, it is possible not to encounter situations where it is impossible to convince the court and effectively protect the interests of the client. Therefore, it seems to me that so far nothing threatens corporate law in Russia. I also don't see any tendencies that we will move to state ownership and corporations will disappear as a phenomenon. Private lawyers who deal with relations between nominally non-state merchants will still be needed in the seemingly continuing free economy. For example, when I draw up some kind of contract, I don’t think in the context of “what a horror, we have corrupt courts, how will the client protect his interests?” I assume that the client has a request, he came to us so that we can help him, and I must try to do my job well.
So far, nothing threatens corporate law in Russia
Yes, the circle of clients who turn to us is decreasing, foreign interest in doing business in Russia is decreasing, but structurally nothing has changed yet. Relatively speaking, if earlier we dealt with foreign companies, now it will be Russian companies. But the departure of foreign law firms from the country is a very negative trend that will have a severe impact on the legal labor market. And not only because of the decrease in jobs, but also because of the decline in professional standards. Under these conditions, it is very difficult to talk about career prospects, since the dream job no longer exists and there is no feeling that it will appear in the near future.
