April 2000

Teaching Law in Russia

by Frederick M. Lorenz
Guest Editor

As I walked through the lovely University of Washington campus this fall, I was in a state of culture shock. Well-manicured grounds, friendly staff, state- of-the-art research facilities, and everyone speaking my language! Why is this so? During the previous academic year I lived and lectured in Russia, arriving at the beginning of the financial crisis in August 1998. I left in June 1999 after teaching six courses at three institutions.

In the summer of 1998, I completed a career as a judge advocate in the U.S. Marines. My wife and I were ready to take on a new and unique overseas civilian assignment. After a number of solo assignments with austere conditions in Somalia and Bosnia, I was delighted to be chosen as a Fulbright Senior Scholar in the historic city of St. Petersburg. Established in 1946, the Fulbright program provides travel and living expenses, and an opportunity to lecture as part of a university faculty in the host country. I lectured with both the Faculty of International Relations and the Law Faculty of St. Petersburg State University. Our 26-year-old daughter Marie spent the year with us, working part time at the United States Consulate while developing some local art projects.

We lived in a spacious and bright fifth-floor apartment in a quiet neighborhood just a 10-minute walk from my school. We relied on public transportation, which was convenient and reliable, although often crowded. Most of our shopping was done at the local markets where the produce was fresh and in good supply. We found some of our favorite American products in the few stores that catered to Western tastes and budgets. During the early stages of the financial crisis, we worried as we watched supplies in the stores diminish. Things began to stabilize after a month or so, but the situation was difficult for the average Russian as inflation drove up the price of food. Since I was paid in dollars, there was only a minor impact when the ruble exchange rate went from eight rubles to the dollar, to more than 20 rubles to the dollar. Our main inconvenience was finding a working cash machine, since few establishments take credit cards.

My "home" teaching faculty was the Faculty of International Relations, Department of North American Studies. This was a good placement for me, since all the students and faculty spoke English, and my Russian language skills were very limited. The school is housed in a beautiful old building that was once a monastery. Like most of the public buildings in Russia, the school suffered from maintenance problems. St. Petersburg State is the major regional university, and I had the same privileges as Russian members of the faculty. For the most part, faculty members are not at school when not actually teaching, and there are few private offices. There is no lounge or common place to meet. Most of the faculty hold other jobs, as the teaching profession pays very poorly, the equivalent of $200 or $300 per month.

In addition to my host school, I volunteered to teach at the main law faculty of the state university. During the fall term I presented a course in international humanitarian law, and in the spring semester I taught a course in international law and the use of force. The law faculty is one of the oldest departments of the university, with many famous graduates, including V.I. Lenin. The library holds the surviving remnants of the Czar’s law library, and now has the only computerized legal research facility in Russia. Russian legal education is based on a five-year undergraduate program. There are 900 full-time students and more than 3,000 part-time students attending the law school. Graduates generally go on to positions in government or the commercial sector. The law school is better equipped and organized than the other schools, and there is a modern research facility.

Teaching in Russia required some major adjustments. The university schedules are slow to be determined and difficult to follow, and changes often occur at the last minute. For students, class attendance is optional; they tend to "collaborate" on everything, and even help each other on the written exams in class if allowed. At the end of the semester students can approach the teacher and ask for an exam (which is usually oral), and if they can show proficiency, they are entitled to a grade. This is true even if they have not attended the classes. But since I announced in the beginning that class participation would be part of my requirement, I was not very flexible with the handful of students who showed up at the end of the semester. Overall, I was delighted with the enthusiasm and quality of my students. I marveled at their command of English as I struggled to learn Russian. They were bright, capable, and open to new ideas. None of them wanted to turn back the clock and follow those who call for a return to Communism.

Before I left the United States, I was warned that the Russian educational system was traditionally based on lectures alone, with little opportunity for discussion or expressing different points of view. The expected role of the professor is to provide "the answers." Students take notes and return the material verbatim on exams. But in my classes I was pleasantly surprised. I told the students at the outset that I would use "the American method" and require class participation. I had some great discussions as part of my classes, and most students were willing to speak their minds. Only a few at the Faculty of International Relations seemed willing to criticize U.S. foreign policy in my class, but I seemed to get more independent thinkers in the law school. This may be in part explained by their level of English language skills and their legal training.

At the law school and at the Faculty of International Relations, we discussed the ongoing impeachment proceedings in the United States. There was much publicity in the Russian media. Most students argued that the affair should be a personal matter and the impeachment should be dropped. There were jokes and offhand remarks. Most of them seemed to miss the point of an integrity issue, and that American laws may have been broken. These discussions led me to think about a more important question: How do I approach the question of moral standards and ethics in class? In a country where many leaders have lined their own pockets and criminal "Mafia" elements run wild, many Russians take the view that "I would do the same thing if I were in their position." The years of Communism have resulted in a strong distrust for the government, and may explain the unwillingness of the people to pay taxes. Parents lived one life for the Party and another life for the family, and truth was very situation dependent. Today’s students are growing up in a country that is often described as morally adrift. In my classes I began to talk about ethics and the long-term impact on society and government. This is a new subject in Russia, but one that must be addressed. If you look to the time before the Bolsheviks, there was a Russian tradition of honor, loyalty and integrity. Russia led the way in the early development of humanitarian law, convening conferences in St. Petersburg and The Hague. There may be something in Russian history to draw upon in developing a sense of moral values.

One of the best things about living in St. Petersburg was the selection of cultural opportunities. During Soviet times, Russia was the land of subsidized performing arts, built on a great Russian national tradition. The consistency and quality of the performances today are remarkable. We regularly attended world-class opera and symphony productions, and the tickets cost about a dollar each. My wife and I qualified for the "resident" rate with my faculty ID card. The artists are underpaid and work under difficult conditions, like most workers in Russia, but they keep on performing. There has also been a revival of religious choral music, and we often dropped into Russian Orthodox churches just to listen to the choirs. The unique polyphonic sound may be even sweeter because it was suppressed for so long. During the holidays we went to a Christmas concert of the St. Petersburg Children’s Choir at the Smolney Cathedral. It is next door to the Smolney Institute, the seat of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. What would Lenin think if he had returned from the grave to hear the performance? A hundred smiling Russian children sang "Hark, the Herald Angels Sing" in English, underneath a huge replica of the Imperial Russian Eagle. Quoting Bob Dylan, "The times they are a changin’."

Based on reports of crime in Russia, many friends asked us about our personal security. An old friend in the United States suggested that we could simply have gone to the Bronx and saved the air fare! Perhaps we were naive, but we felt very safe in Russia. We lived in a Russian neighborhood and did not attract much attention. Crime in the city seemed to be mostly minor property theft and pickpockets targeting foreigners. Crimes of violence were directed mainly at political or "Mafia" figures, and that has unfortunately been fairly common and publicized. I saw single well-dressed Russian women walking alone any time of day or night, and unaccompanied women regularly hail "casual cabs" for a 20-ruble ride. We rarely heard of crimes of violence against foreigners, and we listened very carefully to what the expatriate community and the United States Consulate staff were telling us. I am convinced that we would have been at greater risk in a major American city. In a sense, life is more predictable (though tougher) in Russia. In all their written reports, Fulbright Scholars claimed their biggest threat in Russia over the past two years was falling on the icy streets and breaking bones.

World news reported the St. Petersburg murder of Parliament (Duma) member Galina Starovoitova in November. There is speculation that she was killed because she was collecting information on corruption. She was an outspoken voice for reform in Russia, spoke excellent English, and had lectured at Brown University in the United States. Her picture with her 10-year-old grandson would appear regularly in the local press. I went to Pushkin Square during the funeral, where long lines of somber Russians paid their respects, all in a somber mood. It was a sad day for democracy in Russia. I noticed there were very few young people at her funeral. I asked some of my students about this, and they said that most young people were too busy with their own lives to attend.

In early March we presented a special American mock trial in the English language, for an audience of about 75 Russians. I obtained the materials from the ABA over the Internet. The script was used in a United States high school civic education project. I was the judge, we used American volunteers to act as witnesses, and some talented Russian law students played the attorneys. My daughter Marie played the "victim" in a case of sexual harassment in the workplace. In the case, a male employee of the City used some crude remarks and suggestive photos to make life difficult for a female co-worker in a professional office situation. The City finally transferred her to another job. We wanted to give the audience a look at the United States jury trial system, and to explore Russian attitudes about sexual harassment.

We divided the Russian audience into three groups. They each had the chance to act as the jury and decide the case. All three juries found against the plaintiff in favor of the City. Essentially, they found that no sexual harassment took place, and that the City was not responsible for damages. Later, when we asked the juries about their rationale, nearly all of them said they couldn’t see that the man had done anything wrong. There appeared to be some serious cultural differences: Russians seemed to accept certain types of activity that would be considered offensive in the United States, and there were very few in the audience who could understand why the City would be responsible for the conduct of an employee. The concept of this type of civil liability was quite foreign to them. Despite the lopsided verdict, all the observers and participants said it was a valuable exercise, and they learned much about the American system of justice. Russia has only begun to experiment with the jury system, and the adoption of this type of trial will be a slow process.

In late March we were surprised at the depth of the reaction in Russia to the NATO bombing in Yugoslavia. There were demonstrations at the U.S. Consulate, so we avoided certain areas of the city. We heard some anti-American sentiment, although we did not feel personally threatened. But we noticed a change, with some general negative reaction on the street when someone was heard speaking English. When I got into a cab one day, the driver must have recognized the American accent and began a 10-minute diatribe in Russian about Kosovo. I did not understand all he said, but he was not pleased. The following day another driver asked me if I was American. My answer was "Irlandski" (Irishman). He said, "Belfast?," and I said without hesitation, "Dublin." My closest Russian friend gave me a lecture that surprised me with the depth of feeling against the bombing. The "NATO threat" seemed to be a rallying point for the Communists and the radicals in the Duma. Some wanted to send Russian volunteers to fight NATO. One journalist said the bombing could mean the death of democracy in Russia. Several of my students agreed. I am not sure I concur with that statement, but the bombing set back the democratic process in Russia in a significant way.

Living and teaching in Russia was a great experience. It was a perfect transition year between the Marine Corps and the civilian academic world in the United States. We have many special memories: cross-country skiing, the great ballets and operas, walking in the park in the snow, the "White Nights" in June. There were also some frustrations and inconveniences such as ice on the streets, crowded buses, inoperable cash machines, and dealing with difficult clerks and salespeople. But those were minor compared to the benefits. We made great friends, and learned so much about Russia and its people. We have some regrets that we did not progress further with the language, but will always have an interest in the unique culture and history. I have maintained e-mail contact with several faculty members and students, and I hope to return next year for a short-term project. Perhaps I can figure a way for the plaintiff to prevail in that American mock trial project.

There was an article a few months ago in the New York Times entitled, "Who Lost Russia?" Based on my experience, Russia is not lost, but is merely adrift in turbulent seas. In America we have the benefit of 200 years of democracy, and the blessings of long-term peace and stability. If change comes in Russia, and the rule of law is established, it will have to come from within. The next generation of Russian leaders is in the university system, and I am optimistic.

Prior articles by Frederick M. Lorenz in Bar News include: A Report on Law and Lawyers in Somalia: Will the Rule of Law Replace the Law of the Gun?, February 1994, p. 15; Democratic Reform and the Rule of Law in Cambodia, February 1995, p. 26; Nation Building in the Balkans: U.S. Efforts to Promote the Rule of Law in Bosnia and Herzegovina, October 1996, p. 28.

Back to table of contents >>