Registration of experience – Newspaper Kommersant No. 177 (7378) dated 09/26/2022

The topics we write about almost always require us to look through the archive of Kommersant’s publications: it’s hard to imagine something so new that over the past three decades has not had a start in them. However, the next evolutionary stage, the transformation of what was happening (and described by us earlier) into scientific work, could well not wait – and the current government in the Russian Federation, and even more so big business, rarely formulates any conclusions from previously made decisions in the academic format. And where she was formally engaged in this, the goals and objectives of the classes usually caused skepticism.

All the more unusual was the defense of a doctoral dissertation last week by the head of VEB.RF, Igor Shuvalov, at the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the government. Igor Shuvalov became a Doctor of Law (he defended his Ph. works of applicants for academic degrees from the highest echelons of power), Shuvalov’s speech, which was clearly worried, was full-fledged, and the dissertation was discussed non-ritually. Thus, some of the opponents considered the mechanism of “anti-crisis” moratoriums on bankruptcy justified by Shuvalov to be disputable. The proposed thesis about the modern blurring of the boundaries of public and private law, in contrast to the accepted (and main in the work) thesis that in a situation of “socio-economic crisis” the constant priority of private interests over public ones can shift towards public ones and this shift should be the main and the basic mechanism of “anti-crisis” legislation as a separate part of the body of law in the Russian Federation, could cause a tense discussion of civilians. And there were several such moments.

However, it’s not about them. Igor Shuvalov’s dissertation is interesting in that it is indicated by brackets in its title – the author did not hide (and this is shown in the work, and this covers at least some of the possible flaws in the work, which let legal scholars judge) that we are talking about an attempt to comprehend in doctoral dissertation of his practical experience in the role of First Deputy Prime Minister in the government, primarily in 2008-2009. The main thing that we can confirm is that the dissertation corresponds to what Shuvalov was doing in the White House at that time (we wrote a lot about this ten years ago). And this, apparently, is the first case at this level in the Russian Federation, when someone tried to make a scientific legal theory out of their own practice in power, and not a law, memoirs or an interview in Kommersant. A dissertation is a lot more labor intensive, but it seems to be the best way to frame the experience.