Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Law Is a Causeway: Metaphor and the Rule of Law in Russia

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Legal Doctrines of the Rule of Law and the Legal State (Rechtsstaat)

Part of the book series: Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice ((IUSGENT,volume 38))

  • 1973 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores how a metaphor for the rule of law created by the playwright Robert Bolt captures the difficulty that Russia has experienced in its self-proclaimed pursuit of a rule-of-law state: “The law is not a ‘light’ for you or any man to see by; the law is not an instrument of any kind. The law is a causeway upon which, so long as he keeps to it, a citizen may walk safely.” In Russia, the failure to build a rule-of-law state has been, among other things, a failure to create what this metaphor describes as the essence of that concept. The essay concludes with a case study taken from the author’s experience as an expert invited to submit a report to the Russian President’s Council on the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights.

This essay was completed in fall 2013 while I was an O’Brien Fellow-in-Residence at the Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism, Faculty of Law, McGill University. I wish to thank Ferdinand Feldbrugge, René Provost, Peter Solomon, and Marika Giles Samson for their helpful comments. I alone am responsible for the contents of this essay.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Заявление членов Совета при Президенте Российсской Федерации по развитию гражданского общества и правам человека, 09.12.2011. This essay adopts a short form of this official title.

  2. 2.

    Приговор Хамовнического районного суда г. Москвы от 27.12.2010 г.

  3. 3.

    Приговор Мещанского районного суда г. Москвы от 16.5.2005 г.

  4. 4.

    Transcript of “A Conversation with Vladimir Putin,” which aired on TV channels “Rossiya” and “Rossiya 24,” and radio stations “Mayak,” “Vesti FM,” and “Radio Rossiya” on Dec. 16, 2010: http://archive.government.ru/docs/13427/

  5. 5.

    Maria Kuchma, “Russian presidential candidates play Khodorkovsky card,” RIA-Novosti, Jan. 12, 2012. http://en.ria.ru/analysis/20120112/170725351.html; see also Alexandra Odynova, “Rights Council: Free Khodorkovsky,” Moscow Times, Dec. 22, 2011. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/sitemap/free/2011/12/article/rights-council-free-khodorkovsky/450313.html

  6. 6.

    News Conference of Vladimir Putin, Moscow, December 20, 2012 (transcript at Johnson’s Russia List # 5, January 8, 2013) (“As for Mr Khodorkovsky, there is no personal prosecution in this case. I remember very well how it developed. There still are attempts to present it as a political case. Was Mr Khodorkovsky engaged in politics? Was he a State Duma deputy? Was he a leader of a political party? No, he wasn’t any of those things. It’s a purely economic offence and the court made a ruling.”).

  7. 7.

    See Letter from Mikhail Fedotov, Chairman of the Human Rights Council, to Jeffrey Kahn, Feb. 13, 2013 (quoting warrant).

  8. 8.

    Открытое письмо Владимира Путина к российским избирателям, 25.02.2000, Коммерсантъ, http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/141144

  9. 9.

    See, for example, Juan J. Linz and Alfred Stepan, Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe (1996). Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, at 10.

  10. 10.

    See, for example, Rachel Kleinfeld, “Competing Definitions of the Rule of Law,” in Promoting the Rule of Law Abroad: In Search of Knowledge, Thomas Carothers, ed. (2006). Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC, at 31–73; Martin Krygier, “Rule of Law,” in The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law, Rosenfeld & Sajó, eds. (2012).

  11. 11.

    This claim is contested. Compare, Berkey v Third Ave. Ry. Co., 244 N.Y. 84, 94 (1926) (Cardozo, J.) (“Metaphors in law are to be narrowly watched, for starting as devices to liberate thought, they end often by enslaving it.”).

  12. 12.

    Elizabeth Camp, “Two Varieties of Literary Imagination: Metaphor, Fiction, and Thought Experiments,” in Midwest Studies in Philosophy: Poetry and Philosophy XXXIII. Howard Wettstein, ed., (2009), at 128.

  13. 13.

    Richard H. Fallon, Jr., “‘The Rule of Law’ as a Concept in Constitutional Discourse,” 97 Colum. L. Rev. (1997) at 6.

  14. 14.

    Enchanted by Boleyn and needing a son to secure Tudor succession, the King claimed that his heirless marriage contravened Leviticus: he had married his brother’s wife (albeit by papal dispensation). Pope Clement VII refused an annulment, perhaps because canon law forbade it or perhaps because he was a virtual prisoner of Catherine’s nephew, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. This seemingly theological dispute thus raised enormous political and legal issues for England’s domestic and international affairs. Peter Ackroyd, The Life of Thomas More (1998). Doubleday, USA, at 263–275; Richard Marius. Thomas More (1984). Alfred A. Knopf, New York, at 213–16.

  15. 15.

    Ackroyd, at 266–68; Marius, at 216.

  16. 16.

    Ackroyd, at 302.

  17. 17.

    Letter from More to Cromwell, March 5, 1534, reprinted in A Thomas More Source Book, Gerard Wegemer & Stephen Smith, eds. (2004) at 358.

  18. 18.

    Id., at 353 (Paris Newsletter account of the trial, August 4, 1535).

  19. 19.

    Robert Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), Act II (stage directions omitted).

  20. 20.

    Id.

  21. 21.

    Others have noted that the rule of law may be approached in this way. See Iain Stewart, “From ‘Rule of Law’ to ‘Legal State’: A Time of Reincarnation?” Macquarie Law Working Paper (Nov. 2007) at 4 (“[I]t appears to be far easier to say what ‘the rule of law’ does than to state what it is.”).

  22. 22.

    Id., Act I.

  23. 23.

    Jeremy Waldron, “The Rule of Law and the Importance of Procedure,” New York University School of Law Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 10-73 (Oct. 2010) at 14 (“Applying a norm to a human individual is not like deciding what to do about a rabid animal or a dilapidated house. It involves paying attention to a point of view and respecting the personality of the entity one is dealing with.”).

  24. 24.

    The best empirical work in this area is by Kathryn Hendley. See Kathryn Hendley, “The Puzzling Non-Consequences of Societal Distrust of Courts: Explaining the Use of Russian Courts,” 45 Cornell Int’l L.J. (2012) at 523.

  25. 25.

    Ernst Fraenkel, The Dual State: A Contribution to the Theory of Dictatorship (1941). I first heard this term used with reference to post-Soviet Russia by Professor Kim Lane Scheppele on a panel I organized, “The Dictatorship of Law: The Khodorkovsky Case, Human Rights, and the Rule of Law in Russia,” AALS National Conference, Washington D.C., January 6, 2012. In personal correspondence, Professor Peter Solomon noted to me that in the 1970s specialists on Soviet law debated the applicability to Soviet institutional hierarchies of Fraenkel’s divisions between the normative and prerogative states in Nazi Germany.

  26. 26.

    Kathryn Hendley, “Varieties of Legal Dualism: Making Sense of the Role of Law in Contemporary Russia,” 29 Wis. Int’l L.J. (2011) at 233.

  27. 27.

    Consider a few: “Где закон, там и обида” (“Where there is a law, there is an offense.”) inverts the classic Latin maxim Nullum crimen sine lege (“No crime without law”) from a defensive stance against power to an offensive tool of the powerful, emphasizing the use of law to find fault. A similar tone is found in “Если бы не закон, не было бы и преступника” (“If there were no law, then there would be no criminal.”). Consider, too, “Закон, что паутина: шмель проскочит, а муха увязнет” (“The law is like a spider’s web: the bumble-bee tears through but the fly gets stuck.”) and “Закон – дышло: куда захочешь, туда и воротишь” (“The law is a wagon’s shaft: where you want to go, there you turn it.”). Владимир Даль, Пословицы русского народа (1957) at 245.

  28. 28.

    Vladimir Gsovski, Soviet Civil Law System, Vol. 1 (1948) at 241.

  29. 29.

    Vladimir Kudryavtsev, Director of the Institute of State and Law and a frequent advisor to Gorbachev, as quoted in Archie Brown, The Gorbachev Factor (1996) at 146.

  30. 30.

    Bernard Rudden, “Civil Law, Civil Society and the Russian Constitution,” 110 L.Q.R. (1994) at 56.

  31. 31.

    William Partlett, “Putin’s Artful Jurisprudence,” The National Interest, Jan. 2, 2013. http://nationalintrest.org/article/putins-artful-jurisprudence-7882

  32. 32.

    See Thomas Firestone, “Armed Injustice: Abuse of the Law and Complex Crime in Post-Soviet Russia,” 38 Denv. J. Int’l L. & Pol’y 556–59 (2010) at 556–59; Thomas Firestone, “Criminal Corporate Raiding in Russia,” 42 Int’l Law. (2008) at 1207.

  33. 33.

    Firestone, “Armed Injustice,” supra note 31, at 556.

  34. 34.

    David M. Herszenhorn & Mark Mazzetti, “Russia Expels Former American Embassy Official,” N.Y. Times, May 19, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/20/world/europe/russia-expels-former-american-embassy-official.html

  35. 35.

    Firestone, “Armed Injustice,” supra note 31, at 572.

  36. 36.

    Rudden, supra note 29.

  37. 37.

    Article 129 (slander) and Article 130 (Insult) were decriminalized in December 2011 under President Medvedev. See Article 1(45) in Федеральный закон от 7 декабря 2011 г. N 420-ФЗ. Slander was returned to the Criminal Code under a new Article 128.1 by President Putin roughly 8 months later. See Федеральный закон от 28 июля 2012 г. N 141-ФЗ “О внесении изменений в Уголовный кодекс Российской Федерации и отдельные законодательные акты Российской Федерации.”

  38. 38.

    Федеральный закон от 12 ноября 2012 г. N 190-ФЗ “О внесении изменений в Уголовный кодекс Российской Федерации и в статью 151 Уголовно-процессуального кодекса Российской Федерации”. In its previous version, Article 275 of the Criminal Code defined treason as “espionage, the delivery of a state secret or other assistance to a foreign state, foreign organization, or their representatives in carrying out hostile acts to damage the foreign security of the Russian Federation.” Федеральный закон от 27 декабря 2009 г. N 377-ФЗ. The new law expands treason to include the rendering of “financial, material-technical, consultative, or other assistance to a foreign state, international or foreign organization or their representatives in activity directed against the security of the Russian Federation.” The limiting element in the previous version, requiring damage to Russia’s “foreign security” (“ущерб внешней безопасности”), has been narrowed by deleting the qualifier to acts “that are directed against the security” of the state.

  39. 39.

    Федеральный закон от 28 декабря 2012 г. N 272-ФЗ, “О мерах воздействия на лиц, причастных к нарушениям основополагающих прав и свобод человека, прав и свобод граждан Российской Федерации”; Федеральный закон от 20 июля 2012 г. N 121-ФЗ “О внесении изменений в отдельные законодательные акты Российской Федерации в части регулирования деятельности некоммерческих организаций, выполняющих функции иностранного агента”.

  40. 40.

    David M. Herszenhorn, “Russian Court Convicts A Kremlin Critic Posthumously,” N.Y. Times, July 11, 2013. It is worth noting that the Human Rights Council examined Magnitsky’s case immediately prior to its work on the Khodorkovsky case. It gathered experts who wrote a high-quality and methodically rigorous report that returned public attention to the case. The Council’s work was cited by the United States Congress. See Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-208, § 402(8), 126 Stat. 1496, 1503 (2012).

  41. 41.

    The Council traces its origin to the Human Rights Commission established (by decree) by Boris Yeltsin in 1993 and led by the well-known Soviet-era dissident Sergei Kovalev. See http://president-sovet.ru/about/. The author knows of no scholarship published in English or Russian on the Human Rights Council in its current incarnation. Kovalev resigned his post in 1996 in opposition to Yeltsin’s war in Chechnya. See Sergei Kovalev (trans. by Catherine A. Fitzpatrick), A Letter of Resignation, New York Review of Books (Feb. 29, 1996). For much of Vladimir Putin’s first two terms in office and the first half of Dmitrii Medvedev’s presidency, there existed a Presidential Council on Assistance in the Development of Institutions of Civil Society and Human Rights. But again, the Council lacked real autonomy; its existence depended entirely on presidential decree. See Указ Президента Российской Федерации от 6 ноября 2004 г. № 1417 “О Совете при Президенте Российской Федерации по содействию развитию институтов гражданского общества и правам человека”. The Council could hardly have been considered overly successful during Putin’s first two terms as President. But as Medvedev entered the twilight of his presidential term, the Council appeared to have been given a new lease on life. Mikhail Fedotov was named chair of the Council in October 2010. See Указ Президента Российской Федерации от 12 октября 2010 г. № 1234 “О Председателе Совета при Президенте Российской Федерации по содействию развитию институтов гражданского общества и правам человека”. And Medvedev signed a new decree in February 2011 that seemed to expand the Council’s powers and confirmed a membership composed of the leading lights of the Russian human rights movement. See Указ Президента Российской Федерации от 1 февраля 2011 г. № 120 “О Совете при Президенте Российской Федерации по развитию гражданского общества и правам человека”.

  42. 42.

    Christian Neef and Matthias Schepp, Exiled Economic Adviser: “Putin Is Afraid of the Public,” Der Spiegel, June 10, 2013. http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/russian-economist-sergei-guriev-putin-fears-all-opposition-a-905306.html

  43. 43.

    Detailed factual background may be found in numerous publications, including my report, reprinted in 4 Journal of Eurasian Law, No. 3 (2011).

  44. 44.

    See Lebedev v. Russia, App. No. 4493/04 (Oct. 25, 2007); Vasilii Aleksanyan v. Russia, App. No. 46468/06 (Dec. 8, 2008); Khodorkovsky v. Russia, App. No. 5829/04 (May 31, 2011); OAO Neftyanaya Kompaniya Yukos v. Russia, App. No. 14902/04 (September 20, 2011); Khodorkovskiy & Lebedev v. Russia, App. Nos. 11082/06 & 13772/05 (July 25, 2013). It should be noted that, in this latest judgment, the Court did not find a violation of Convention Article 18, which prohibits the restriction of protected rights “for any purpose other than those for which they have been prescribed,” e.g. political cases. The Court observed that “Article 18 is rarely invoked and there have been few cases where the Court declared a complaint under Article 18 admissible, let alone found a violation thereof,” while, with remarkable understatement, it also acknowledged “that the circumstances surrounding the applicants’ criminal case may be interpreted as supporting the applicants’ claim of improper motives.” Id. at 898, 901. However, the Court refused to depart from its extremely high standard of direct proof for such allegations and thus declined to find a violation of the Convention. Id. at 897–909.

  45. 45.

    Parliamentary Assembly Resolution 1418 (Jan. 25, 2005), The Circumstances Surrounding the Arrest and Prosecution of Leading Yukos Executives.

  46. 46.

    Стенографический отчёт о заседании Совета по развитию гражданского общества и правам человека, 1 февраля 2011 года, 12:00, Екатеринбург, http://www.president-sovet.ru/meeting_with_president_of_russia/meeting_with_president_in_yekaterinburg_01_02_2011/verbatim_report/index.php. Sergei Karaganov, Tamara Morshchakova, and Irina Yasina raised the issue in their recorded remarks.

  47. 47.

    Id.

  48. 48.

    Id.

  49. 49.

    Елена Масюк, Тамара Морщакова: “Я не могу оставить свою землю, на которой я выросла,” Новая газета, 08.06.2013, http://www.novayagazeta.ru/politics/58532.html (Morshchakova: “The Chairmen of the Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, and Supreme Arbitration Court declared, when the Council showed such initiative and announced this to the President, that yes, society has the right to such a public analysis, that courts, like other state structures, are not exempted from public control, that society has the right to know and understand what occurs in the activity of every organ of power.”); see also Речь члена Совета Т.Г. Морщаковой на пресс-конференции 06 февраля 2013 года, http://president-sovet.ru/structure/group_6/materials/rech_chlena_soveta_t_g_morshchakovoy_na_press_konferentsii_06_fevralya_2013_goda_.php

  50. 50.

    See Протокол заседания Рабочей группы по гражданскому участию в судебно-правовой сфере (совместно с рабочей группой по делу Магнитского), 5 мая 2011 г., at: http://www.president-sovet.ru/structure/group_8/materials/meeting_of_the_working_group.php

  51. 51.

    Letter to Jeffrey Kahn from M.A. Fedotov and T.G. Morshchakova, April 1, 2011.

  52. 52.

    Id.

  53. 53.

    Id.

  54. 54.

    See Принципы организации экспертизы (правового анализа) судебных актов по уголовному делу Ходорковского М.Б. и Лебедева П.Л. (“Привлекаемые Советом при Президенте РФ эксперты не имеют мандата на то, чтобы выступить с политической оценкой по поводу состоявшегося процесса.”), at: http://www.president-sovet.ru/structure/group_6/materials/principles_of_organization_of_expert_legal_analysis_of_judicial_decisions_in_the_criminal_case_of_mb.php

  55. 55.

    Id.

  56. 56.

    Letter to Kahn from Fedotov and Morshchakova, supra note 50.

  57. 57.

    Изложение основных тем, составших предмет общественной научной экспертизы по уголвному делу М.Б. Ходорковского и П.Л. Лебедева, 21.12.2012, http://president-sovet.ru/structure/group_6/materials/izlozenie_tem.php

  58. 58.

    Sergei Guriev, “Why I Am Not Returning to Russia,” N.Y. Times, June 5, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/opinion/global/sergei-guriev-why-i-am-not-returning-to-russia.html. Howard Amos, “Russian Scholars Wary After Top Economist Flees Country,” RIA Novosti, reprinted in Johnson’s Russia List # 102 (June 6, 2013). In personal correspondence, Professor Feldbrugge stated to me that in his reply to Mr. Fedotov he had stressed that he had never received directly or indirectly any money or favours from anybody in connection with the experts’ reports, that it would in any case be very unlikely that he would ever be selected as the beneficiary of Mr. Khodorkovsky’s benevolence, in view of the negative views he had expressed in the past about Khodorkovsky’s activities, and that the panel members, including himself, all had written individual reports and there was no co-ordination at any time between the panel members (at least where he was concerned).

  59. 59.

    Пресс-релиз к заседанию Совета при Президенте Российской Федерации по развитию гражданского общества и правам человека 21.12.2011, http://president-sovet.ru/structure/group_6/materials/ukos_2.php

  60. 60.

    Рабочая встреча с советником Президента, председателем Совета по развитию гражданского общества и правам человека Михаилом Федотовым, 27 декабря 2011 года, http://news.kremlin.ru/news/14153

  61. 61.

    Id.

  62. 62.

    The Council recommended expanded use of juries for certain crimes; the elaboration of bases for the exclusion of judges due to conflicts of interests, including the appearance of influence by law enforcement officials; greater rights to confront witnesses and present evidence; limits on prosecution for certain crimes; limits on pre-trial detention; reform of parole and pardon, and an amnesty for those convicted of certain economic crimes. See Рекомендации по итогам проведения общественной экспертизы, 21.12.2011, http://president-sovet.ru/structure/group_6/materials/rekomendazii_po_itogam.php

  63. 63.

    See Рекомендации, supra note 61.

  64. 64.

    Khodorkovskiy v. Lebedev v. Russia, App. Nos. 11082/06 & 13772/05 (July 25, 2013).

  65. 65.

    Tom Balmforth, “Putin Packs Presidential Human Rights Council,” Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Nov. 12, 2012. http://www.rferl.org/content/putin-appoints-new-members-presidential-human-rights-council-russia/24768384.html

  66. 66.

    Interfax.ru, “Федотов о заявлении СК РФ по экспертизе дела ЮКОСа: “учите матчасть,”” Apr. 1, 2012, http://www.interfax.ru/news.asp?id=238756; Экспертов СПЧ преследуют за доклад по второму делу “ЮКОСа”, 06.02.2013, http://grani.ru/Politics/Russia/yukos/m.211325.html

  67. 67.

    Леонид Никитинский, Третье дело ЮКОСа, о “печеньках,” Новая газета, 08.02.2013, http://www.novayagazeta.ru/politics/56623.html

  68. 68.

    Id.

  69. 69.

    Id.

  70. 70.

    Id.

  71. 71.

    Речь члена Совета Т.Г. Морщаковой на пресс-конференции 06 февраля 2013 года, http://president-sovet.ru/structure/group_6/materials/rech_chlena_soveta_t_g_morshchakovoy_na_press_konferentsii_06_fevralya_2013_goda_.php

  72. 72.

    Постановление Басманного районного суда города Москвы о разкушении производства выемки документов, содержащих информазию, составляющую тайну переписки, 9 апреля 2013 года.

  73. 73.

    Михаил Субботин, “Разбитые зеркала,” 08.02.2013, http://www.gazeta.ru/comments/2013/02/08_a_4957537.shtml

  74. 74.

    Id.; “Yukos Report Authors to Face Questioning,” The Moscow Times, June 26, 2013. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/yukos-report-authors-to-face-questioning/482250.html

  75. 75.

    Ellen Barry, “Economist Flees as Russia Aims Past Protesters,” N.Y. Times, May 29, 2013.

  76. 76.

    Lenta.ru, СПЧ пожаловался на преследования докладчиков по второму делу “ЮКОСа,” 6 февраля 2013, http://lenta.ru/news/2013/02/06/experts/

  77. 77.

    Id.; Мир 24 TV, СПЧ заявили о преследовании экспертов, готовивших доклад по второму делу ЮКОСа, 06.02.2013, http://mir24.tv/news/society/6396581

  78. 78.

    Леонид Никитинский, Подробности третьего “дела ЮКОСа”: Следственный комитет проводит обыски в Казахстане с санкции Басманного суда, Новая газета, 31.5.2013, www.novayagazeta.ru/politics/58386.html

  79. 79.

    Ellen Barry, “Economist Who Fled Russia Cites Peril in Politically Charged Inquiry,” N.Y. Times, May 31, 2013.

  80. 80.

    Sergei Guriev, “Why I Am Not Returning to Russia,” N.Y. Times, June 5, 2013. supra note 57.

  81. 81.

    Id.

  82. 82.

    Ольга Проскурнина, “Персона – Сергей Гуриев, бывший ректор Российской экономической школы,” Ведомости, 11.06.2013 (translation from Johnson’s Russia List # 107, June 13, 2013, # 11).

  83. 83.

    Id.

  84. 84.

    Id.

  85. 85.

    Christian Neef and Matthias Schepp, “Exiled Economic Adviser: ‘Putin Is Afraid of the Public’,” Der Spiegel, June 10, 2013. Supra note 41.

  86. 86.

    See Report, supra note 42. An appendix to the report reveals this cutting-and-pasting between indictment and verdict.

  87. 87.

    “Yukos Report Authors to Face Questioning,” The Moscow Times, June 26, 2013. Софья Самохина, “Экспертов допросили по второму делу ЮКОСа,” Коммерсантъ-Online, 28.06.2013.

  88. 88.

    Самохина, supra note 86.

  89. 89.

    “Rough Justice: Will Khodorkovsky Face Trial Again?” Der Spiegel, 43/2013 (October 21, 2013), http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/russia-appears-to-be-preparing-a-new-case-against-khodorkovsky-a-929017.html

  90. 90.

    See Проскурнина, supra note 81.

  91. 91.

    See Letter from Mikhail Fedotov to Jeffrey Kahn, supra note 6.

  92. 92.

    Id.

  93. 93.

    Jeffrey Kahn, “In Putin’s Russia, Shooting the Messenger,” N.Y. Times, Feb. 25, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/26/opinion/in-putins-russia-shooting-the-messenger.html

  94. 94.

    Андрей Камакин, “Судите сами,” Журнал “Итоги”, 21.02.11, http://www.itogi.ru/russia/2011/8/162040.html (“Что же касается дела Ходорковского и Лебедева, то анализ можно начать только после того, как оно пройдет кассационную инстанцию и приговор вступит в законную силу.”).

  95. 95.

    See Проскурнина, supra note 81.

  96. 96.

    Заявление Совета, в связи с ситуацией, сложившейся вокруг Сергея Гуриева и других экспертов, привлеченных Советом для общественной научной экспертизы по “второму делу ЮКОСа”, 06.06.2013, http://president-sovet.ru/council_decision/council_statement/v_svyazi_s_situatsiey_slozhivsheysya_vokrug_sergeya_gurieva_i_drugikh_ekspertov.php

  97. 97.

    Елена Масюк, supra note 48.

  98. 98.

    T.R.S. Allan, The Rule of Law as the Rule of Reason: Consent and Constitutionalism, 115 L.Q.R. 225 (1999); Id. at 238 (“The rights to receive information and to exchange and debate ideas, whenever such information and ideas concern the content of the laws and the nature of government actions and policies, are integral features of the constitutional interpretation of the rule of law.”).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dedman School of Law, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, USA

    Jeffrey Kahn

Authors
  1. Jeffrey Kahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey Kahn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sullivan & Worcester LLP, New York, New York, USA

    James R. Silkenat

  2. Hofstra University, Hempstead, New York, USA

    James E. Hickey Jr.

  3. Asnis and partners, Moscow, Russia

    Peter D. Barenboim

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kahn, J. (2014). The Law Is a Causeway: Metaphor and the Rule of Law in Russia. In: Silkenat, J., Hickey Jr., J., Barenboim, P. (eds) The Legal Doctrines of the Rule of Law and the Legal State (Rechtsstaat). Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 38. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05585-5_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation