Illness in health, or as a lawyer Law Practsis

September 2010. In the building of the then existing Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, student tickets are presented to freshmen of the magistracy of the Russian School of Private Law under the President of the Russian Federation, one of the best domestic educational institutions in the field of law. Among the happy students was me. On this day, in an atmosphere of endless joy and a huge number of hopes, I remember the performance of Evgeny Alekseevich Sukhanov, Doctor of Law, Professor and one of the outstanding domestic legal scientists.

Evgeny Alekseevich spoke seriously and thoughtfully. He read excerpts from the abstract of the dissertation for the degree of candidate of legal sciences presented for defense in one of the dissertation councils. The work was a meaningless set of words that make up a text devoid of any content. Thus, the professor explained to us, students why poor dissertation studies are harmful not only for science, but also for society as a whole. Subsequently, my teachers in the Russian School of Private Law daily demonstrated the importance of bona fide, honest and smart research work in the field of jurisprudence daily. The performance of Yevgeny Alekseevich Sukhanov in September 2010 and the example of my teachers from the Russian School of Private Law, I remembered all his professional life.

February 2018. Eight years later, I myself defended the candidate dissertation, graduated from the second magistracy at the University of Turin in Italy and taught at the university. It was then that I was asked to act as an opponent for the dissertation of Maria Aleksandrovna Prikhodko “International Pharmaceutical Products” for the degree of candidate of legal sciences. The work was appointed on April 24, 2018 in the dissertation council D 212.123.04 at the Moscow State Law University named after O. E. Kutafina (MGUA).

All the necessary formalities stipulated by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 09.24.2013 No. 842 “On the Procedure for the Presentation of Scientific Streaches” were observed. The dissertation council approved me as an opponent, and on April 9, 2018 I presented an official conclusion.

My 32-page conclusion was very detailed and contained a large number of questions for the dissertation, which, in my opinion, correctly, as it contributes to a scientific discussion. One of the main and most serious, in my opinion, comments was an incorrect borrowing (without links to a source) a dissertation of parts from my scientific work published in 2016. I brought a table with examples of incorrect, in my opinion, borrowing and asked the dissertation to answer this remark during public defense. Of course, both the supervisor and the dissertation were notified of incorrect borrowing. Prikhodko said that she was so inspired by my work that, apparently, she forgot to add links. The supervisor told me that such a situation is unacceptable.

On April 28, 2018, the dissertation notified me that she removed scientific work from protection for health reasons. And a year later, in June 2019, I accidentally found out that the defense of the dissertation took place on March 19, 2019. At the same time, I was replaced by another opponent, from whom, as I found out, there are no publications on the topic of dissertation research. The text of the dissertation was changed by Prikhodko in accordance with my comments: in particular, footnotes were inserted in places of incorrect borrowing. I turned to the supervisor of the dissertant Oksana Viktorovna Lutkova, who is also a teacher in Moscow State University, with the question of how such a situation could happen, but I did not receive an answer to my letter.

Legal analysis of the current situation

As a lawyer, I had a question whether this situation is legal. Considering that the main document regulating the awarding of scientific degrees in the Russian Federation is the mentioned decree of the Government of the Russian Federation “On the Procedure for the Presentation of Scientific Seeps” (hereinafter referred to as the Decree), it is necessary to turn to its provisions.

In accordance with paragraph 38 of the Decree, the applicant for a degree has the right to withdraw the dissertation from consideration in the dissertation council until the dissertation council decisions on the award of the scientific degree. Thus, it is theoretically to present a situation in which the dissertation removes scientific work from defense for health reasons or for other respectful reasons. At the same time, in paragraph 38 there is one important clarification: the dissertation cannot be withdrawn by the dissertation on his own initiative, if there are no links to the author and (or) the source of borrowing materials or individual results in the dissertation (paragraph 14 of the Decree). In my opinion, it was this situation that took place in this case. If so, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 38, the MGua dissertation council was obliged to remove the dissertation from the defense without re -protection and the posting of information on the official website of the MGUA on the Internet for a period of 10 years.

In fact, the fact of incorrect borrowing was not investigated by the dissertation council; In addition, information that scientific work was removed from protection was removed from the website of the dissertation council, that the opponent’s official statement received an opponent’s dissertation, indicating incorrect borrowing, as well as the fact that changes were made to the text of the dissertation and the work was made to defend for the second time.

Moreover, the decision does not provide for the possibility of replacing the opponent in such cases, as well as amendments to the text of the dissertation. In accordance with the resolution, the opponent can be replaced until the moment of protection, only if his review does not meet the requirements (paragraph 23 of the Decree) or if the opponent who gave a negative review was not re -appeared (paragraph 30 of the Resolution). Changes to the dissertation can be made only if the dissertation council made a negative decision based on the results of the defense of the dissertation and scientific work is submitted to re -defense no earlier than a year (paragraph 34 of the Decree).

The logic of the decision is understandable and explained: the removal of the dissertation from the defense at the initiative of the dissertation cannot serve as a mechanism for getting rid of “objectionable” reviews of opponents. If we recognize the legality of this method, then any dissertation council, together with a dissertation who received a review with comments, gets the opportunity to remove the dissertation from defense, make changes to it, delete information about the previously assigned defense, find a new opponent and safely defend himself. Obviously, such a vicious and illegal practice inherently undermines the value and significance of scientific works to defend.

Position of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation

I turned to the Ministry of Education and Science with a request for the compliance of this situation with the requirements of the resolution. On July 2, 2019, I received an official notice of adoption of my application for consideration. It must be considered by the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission by right of the chairman of which is Elena Yuryevna Gracheva - the first vice -rector of the Moscow State Autonomous Okrug, where the defense of the dissertation indicated in the article was held. I sincerely hope that this fact will not affect the objectivity of the consideration of my appeal and that the ministry and respected members of the Expert Council on the right of the Higher Attestation Commission will have enough courage and honesty to give a fair legal assessment of the current situation.

Anna Pilicheva,
cand. yur. Sciences, LL.M. Intellectual Property (University of Turin),
Master of Jurisprudence (Russian School of Private Law)