Significant Progress in Civil Legal Aid Reforms in Russia

When PILnet (then the Public Interest Law Institute) organized its first public discussion in Russia dedicated to issues of legal aid reform about six years ago, the subject was something that hardly anyone was willing to discuss.

The Ministry of Justice simply ignored the event. The few bar leaders who did show up mostly referred to centuries-long traditions of the Russian bar in serving the underprivileged and at the same time complained about a lack of governmental funding. NGOs did not seem to view access to legal aid as a serious priority on the legal reform agenda.

This situation began to change gradually in 2006 when the Russian government, inspired by the Finnish legal aid system, introduced pilot "state legal bureaus" in ten regions out of more than eighty. The bureaus with lawyers on staff provided legal aid in all non-criminal matters to those living below the poverty line, who constituted about 12 percent of Russia's population in 2010, as well as to some vulnerable groups -- pensioners, people with disabilities, and others (criminal legal aid has been historically and remains a pure ex officio model managed by local bar associations). At the same time, some of the more economically advanced regions began introducing their own civil legal aid schemes funded from local budgets and implemented by local bar associations.

Starting in early 2007, within the framework of a three-year Matra-funded project Improving Access to Legal Assistance, PILnet and its Dutch partner, the Center for International Legal Cooperation (CILC), began assisting these efforts. By the end of 2008 the project has collected, analyzed, and adapted for the Russian reader a wealth of international experience in approaching various issues important for any legal aid system, such as eligibility criteria, management, budgeting, and quality assurance. A special focus (in the form of input from Dutch experts and a study tour to the Netherlands) was placed on the Dutch legal aid system as a good example of a comprehensive, well-organized, and effective system.

These developments culminated in late 2008/early 2009, when President Medvedev, addressing a convention of Russian judges, stated that a comprehensive national legal aid system should be created by 2010. According to Medvedev, the new system should build on earlier experiences but also take into account new knowledge acquired in the course of experimenting with state legal bureaus. The President then instructed the Ministry of Justice to draft a new law on civil legal aid.

Having started in January 2009 with an extended meeting, attended not only by representatives of various ministries and other governmental entities, but also by legal academia and several NGOs, including PILnet (quite a novelty for the contemporary legislative process in Russia), the Ministry's working group began drafting the new law in close consultation with two other actors -- the Federal Bar Chamber and PILnet. After several iterations, the draft is now with the President's administration and is expected to be submitted to the State Duma in 2011.

The task is even more challenging than in many other countries sharing Soviet heritage. In addition to common challenges, such as a deep disconnect between the state and the public and between the private and public sectors, Russia has problems of vast distances, poor infrastructure, and socio-economic disparity between its regions, to name just a few.

What is important, however, is that all the stakeholders, most importantly the government and the bar, now appear to have realized three things. First, that civil legal aid is not just the right to counsel, but an important ingredient in reducing social exclusion of the country's most vulnerable population.

Second, that it is not only the very poor who cannot afford to pay for legal assistance: a very large percentage of the population that can pay for food, clothing, and housing still cannot retain a lawyer when needed, and they are prone to joining the ranks of the socially excluded when they face a legal problem. At the same time, no government in the world can afford to provide full-fledged legal assistance for free to all of its citizens.

This is why PILnet advocates the distinction between primary and secondary legal aid, hereby following the Dutch example. Simple legal advice -- or rather legal information -- should be provided to everyone, which will help to prevent escalation of legal conflict (some international experiences show that up to 90 percent of matters may be resolved through primary legal aid). It will also decrease the burden on courts and legal aid providers themselves, who are relieved of the time-consuming procedures necessary to check an applicant's level of income. The current draft makes this distinction but thus far fails to oblige state-operated legal aid entities to provide simple legal advice to everyone.

Third, it is clear that the demand for legal aid in Russia is huge and supply is very limited. Therefore, the new system should take advantage of all existing providers of free legal assistance, public or private: the bar and individual lawyers, NGOs, and law clinics. It should allow for maximum flexibility in each region so that its unique situation can be taken into account. The government should focus on coordinating all these multiple providers for the system to be accessible to all Russian citizens. The draft makes a good job of embracing all existing and potential legal aid providers under the auspices of the proposed system. PILnet and CILC are cautiously optimistic about the future of legal aid in Russia. With consensus in place on the principal points and a new law quickly taking shape, the main challenge -- especially in today's difficult economic situation -- is funding. In light of the country leadership's public commitment to legal aid reform, however, one can expect that it will be one of the policy priorities in the next few years.

Under a new Matra-funded project (which started in March 2010), PILnet and CILC will work on the implementation of the new system, with the main emphasis on mapping the actual legal needs of the population through employing empirical methodologies and piloting solutions for coordinating between multiple legal aid providers. In so doing, PILnet and CILC will pursue the close collaboration developed since 2007 with the national Raad voor Rechtsbijstand and the Juridisch Loket, which represent the main Dutch legal aid institutions.

Last but not least: no matter how good and well funded a legal aid system is in a particular country, there will always be those who fall outside of it: slightly more affluent individuals, people finding themselves in very complex litigation with substantial financial cost, NGOs that pursue important missions and also have legal problems. This is why an effective legal aid system should be complemented with a commitment to pro bono on the part of the legal private sector - another important priority in PILnet's work in Russia and elsewhere.