Biography. Biography of Henry Reznik We are not Anglo-Saxons, we have a slightly different system of law

He worked for five years as an investigator at the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Kazakh SSR, after which he graduated from graduate school at the All-Union Institute of the USSR Prosecutor's Office.

Born on May 11, 1938 in Leningrad, into a family of musicians. Father - Reznik Mark Izrailevich (1905-1969), worked as rector of the Saratov Conservatory, head of the cultural department of the Saratov regional committee of the CPSU, director of the music school of the Zavodsky district of Saratov. Mother - Rafalovich Mirra Grigorievna (born 1910), taught piano at the Saratov Conservatory. His wife, Larisa Yulianovna Lvova, worked as a lawyer. Son - oh. Lvov Andrey Genrievich (born 1967), Orthodox priest. Grandchildren: Savva, Varvara, Serafima, Ekaterina, Sophia.

Henry's parents instilled in him a love of classical music - now he is a regular at concerts at the Moscow Conservatory and the P.I. Concert Hall. Tchaikovsky, he has a rich music library of classics and jazz. But Henry Reznik did not follow in the footsteps of his parents; despite his natural abilities - in particular, absolute pitch - he did not become a musician. G.M. himself Reznik believes that the war got in the way at first: he remembers well the bombing of Saratov, where the family moved just before the start of the Great Patriotic War in connection with his father’s appointment as rector of the Saratov Conservatory, and trips with his mother with concert brigades to combat units. After the war... “I asked my mother why I wasn’t taught music,” recalls G.M. Reznik. - My mother answered that I was restless, it was difficult to sit me down at the instrument, and the environment was not conducive to learning - in two rooms of the communal apartment where I spent my childhood, until the end of the 1940s, several more people evacuated from Leningrad and Ukraine were housed , - grandmother, aunt, father’s brother and sister with two children.”

And then, as Henry Reznik himself puts it, he was “visited” by his jumping ability, which determined his life path for a long time. From the age of 11 G.M. Reznik began regular exercise. At the age of 15, he is already the champion of the Russian Federation in high jump among junior boys. Since the age of 16, he has been playing for the adult Saratov volleyball and basketball teams. In 1955, Reznik competed at the All-Union Schoolchildren Spartakiad for the RSFSR basketball team, and in 1956 for volleyball.

At the same time, an interest in journalism appears. But after graduating from school in 1956, Reznik failed to enter the Faculty of Journalism at Moscow State University. He misses one point in the entrance exams and spends a year at the Institute of Physical Education, where at the same time he took exams for insurance. A volleyball career also does not develop in accordance with ambitious plans. Reznik is taken to the team of MAI masters, but there he finds himself in deep reserve and is practically not allowed onto the site. Reznik himself admits: “I was offended, I thought that I was being bullied, because I jumped high and hit the ball hard, but in fact the “old men” were stronger (and the “old men” were 22-23 years old).”

In 1957, Reznik and several other ambitious peers, stuck on the benches in capital teams, decided to leave Moscow and create their own team in one of the union republics. The choice fell on Tashkent. But combining sports and studying to become a journalist again fails. At the Central Asian State University, the specialization of a journalist exists only for people of local Uzbek nationality, and Reznik decides to enroll in the Faculty of Law. “I thought that if I really have a literary gift, I’ll write like that,” Reznik recalls. The volleyball team created in Tashkent fails to achieve its goal of becoming one of the finalists at the 1959 Spartakiad of the Peoples of the USSR. Henry is invited to Alma-Ata. Here he stands at the origins of the creation of the Almaty “Dorozhnik”: Reznik is the captain of the team, which later, without him, will become the champion of the Soviet Union. Henry also becomes the champion and record holder of Kazakhstan in high jump. “At some competitions, I even competed with the great Valery Brumel - we stormed the same height, 2 meters. The difference was small - he started from this height, and I finished at it,” Reznik jokingly recalls.

Faculty of Law, Kazakh State University G.M. Reznik graduated in 1962. By this time, he had already become seriously interested in jurisprudence, his diploma work “On Legal Presumptions” was awarded at an all-Union student competition, and he received a recommendation for admission to graduate school.

But the sport doesn’t let him go either - after all, he’s still only 24 years old, his jumping ability hasn’t dropped yet, the university volleyball team, of which he is the captain, is playing better and better. And Reznik postpones his return to Russia, going to work in the investigative department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Kazakhstan. The new minister, a big fan of volleyball, accepts his condition - to enroll university graduates - volleyball players - into the ministry staff. The volleyball team of the Kazakh "Dynamo" thunders throughout the country, losing only to its Muscovite teammates, and takes prizes in the 2nd group of the USSR championship, and Reznik successfully combines sports with the work of an investigator. He evaluates this period of his life as a great success: “I was immediately enrolled in the republican investigative department. The most experienced qualified investigators worked there, who had previously worked for many years locally - in cities and districts. I ended up “at the top” only thanks to volleyball - no experience at all in investigative work! But this, paradoxically, was luck. Unlike other graduates who were assigned to lower-level investigative departments and stewed for a long time “in their own juices,” I found myself next to the aces of the investigation and could learn every day with them. With special gratitude I remember the highest professionals Viktor Kopeliovich and Yuri Maltsev, who became my teachers." Over the course of 4 years, Henry Reznik went from an ordinary investigator to an investigator for particularly important cases, investigating more than one major criminal case.

In 1966, Reznik entered full-time graduate school at the All-Union Institute for the Study of the Causes and Development of Crime Prevention Measures of the USSR Prosecutor's Office, 3 years later he graduated from it, having defended his Ph.D. thesis, and remained to work at the same institute as a research assistant. In the mid-1960s - early 1970s, the All-Union Institute of the USSR Prosecutor's Office was rightfully considered the center of scientific thought in the field of criminal legal disciplines. Outstanding scientists worked there - Igor Ivanovich Kirnets, Vladimir Nikolaevich Kudryavtsev, Boris Sergeevich Nikiforov, Ilya Davydovich Perlov, Alexey Adolfovich Gertsenzon, Vera Isaakovna Kaminskaya, Alexey Alexandrovich Eisman, Alexander Ruvimovich Ratinov, Genrikh Mikhailovich Minkovsky, Inga Borisovna Mikhailovskaya, Alexander Maksimovich Yakovlev. By the way, the institute was famous not only for its scientific seminars, but also for its famous “cabbage shows.” G.M. Reznik worked there until 1987. During this period, he prepared the monograph “Inner Conviction in Evaluating Evidence” (1977), and wrote the books “The Right to Defense” (1976); "When Responsibility Comes" (1979); “The Constitutional Right to Defense” (1980), dozens of articles, chapters and sections of scientific courses, commentaries and teaching aids, a number of criminological studies of crime have been conducted.

From 1982 to 1985, Reznik headed the research laboratory of the All-Union Institute for the Improvement of Justice Workers (now the Legal Academy of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation), where he conducted research on the state of justice in the country and the legal attitudes of judges. During these years, he published articles on issues of criminal procedure, criminal law and criminological sciences.

From the numerous scientific works of G.M. Reznik, according to the assessments of legal scholars and practitioners and the citation index, the following stand out more often than others: “The Personality of a Criminal: Legal and Criminological Content” (1981); "Public Opinion as a Factor in Crime Control Planning" (1982); "On the question of defining the concept of crime" (1986); "The Contradictions of Modern Urbanization and Crime" (1985); "Lawyer: the prestige of the profession" (1987). The last two works published in the central scientific journal "Soviet State and Law" (now "State and Law") were noted as the best articles of the year.

The work of researcher G.M. Reznik combined his work with teaching. He gave lectures and conducted classes on the special courses he created on criminology, criminal law and criminal procedure in educational institutions such as the Institute for Advanced Studies of Investigators, the Institute for Advanced Training of Prosecutors, the Academy of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Law Academy and others.

In 1985, Reznik became a lawyer at the Moscow City Bar Association, and in 1989-91 he headed the Research Institute of Advocacy. Over the years of legal practice G.M. Reznik participated in many major trials. He defended in criminal cases the Prime Minister of Uzbekistan N. Khudayberdiev, the prosecutor of the Ochamchira region of Abkhazia V. Gurdzhua, the head of the security service of the President of the USSR General Yu. Plekhanov (in the case of the State Emergency Committee). His trustees were politician and publicist V. Novodvorskaya, pacifist conscientious objector A. Pronozin, journalists V. Poegli, A. Babitsky, O. Kitova, ecologists A. Nikitin and G. Pasko, writer V. Sorokin, famous entrepreneurs V. Ryashentsev ( case of the concern "ANT"), V. Gusinsky, B. Berezovsky. In civil cases, represented the interests of the President of Russia B. Yeltsin, prominent politicians and statesmen E. Gaidar, A. Chubais, A. Shokhin, writer A. Sinyavsky, cultural and artistic figures R. Rozhdestvensky, Yu. Temirkanov, N. Petrov, L. Chizhik. Having become a lawyer, G.M. Reznik continues his scientific and teaching activities. Currently, he heads the Department of Advocacy at the Law University at the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Journalism occupies a special place in the professional activity of legal scholar Reznik. In 1987, the Moskovskaya Pravda newspaper published Reznik’s articles “Time to dispel myths” and “From myths to truth,” devoted to the need for a radical restructuring of our legal system. Since then, Reznik’s sharp analytical articles and interviews have been regularly published in leading periodicals.

G.M. Reznik is the president of the Moscow Bar Association, vice-president of the Federal Union of Lawyers of Russia, vice-president of the International Union (Commonwealth) of Lawyers, director of the Research Institute of Advocacy. Member of the Moscow Helsinki Group, member of the presidium of the Russian Jewish Congress, member of the presidium of the National Anti-Corruption Committee, member of the Council for the Improvement of Justice under the President of Russia. Honored Lawyer of Russia, Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor; awarded the gold medal named after F.N. Plevako (1998) for high professional excellence and contribution to the development of the Russian legal profession, the Honorary Badge “Public Recognition” (2000) for active human rights activities and contribution to the development of the independent legal profession.

He is interested in sports, music, theater, poetry.

This man quite easily, with a certain touch of grace, is able to instill in the thoughts of the people around him the confidence that he is a descendant of one of the ancient families. And he succeeds quite simply. Indeed, one has only to look at him, his appearance, manner of communication with his interlocutor, behavior and aristocracy, and any doubts immediately fade into the background.

His name is known to almost everyone, but in most cases it is pronounced for a specific, completely ambiguous reason. Despite the fact that this is an interesting, even curious person, unfortunately, not much is known about her. This person does not like to give interviews and share childhood memories. Let's try to lift the veil of secrecy at least a little. So, Henry Reznik is one of the best lawyers of our time in Russia.

Childhood of a future genius

Little Henry for the first time at saw this world on the eleventh of May 1938 in one of the most beautiful cities in Russia - Leningrad. His childhood was no different from the childhood of his peers. He played and fought equally with other children (by the way, more often the victory was on the side of our hero), built castles from pebbles and flew homemade kites.

At the age of ten years old, he learned that his nationality was Jewish. But this did not bother him at all, and even made him happy. The future lawyer Henry Reznik was confident from childhood that he would become a famous person. Where this confidence came from in him, he could not understand even after more than a dozen years, when he was already quite famous and, to be honest, wealthy.

Mom and Dad Reznik

Little Henry's mother was a pianist. It was along her family tree that the reunion of two families took place: the Schneersons and the Rafalovichs. Thanks to his mother, Reznik Henry became a descendant of these families: on the one hand, Rafalovich, who was the chief rabbi of the Kremenchug synagogue, on the other, Schneerson, who was a Lubavitcher rebbe.

Little Henry's dad came from a Jewish family whose income was very small. They lived near Kremenchug, in the town of Znamenka. Dad had a very clear, beautiful voice. Unfortunately, due to some defect, he did not complete his studies at the conservatory in the vocal department. Therefore, he had to move to another faculty. The document that dad received was a diploma from the Moscow Conservatory.

The family was lucky enough to leave Leningrad shortly before the start of the terrible blockade. Their life continued in Saratov. It was in this city that Mark Reznik (father) headed the local conservatory.

Did not extend the dynasty of musicians

It was not for nothing that his parents instilled in their son a love of classical music. Today, lawyer Henry Reznik is a regular visitor to the Tchaikovsky Concert Hall and the Moscow Conservatory. And in his house there is a rich music library of jazz and classics. But Henry Markovich decided not to follow in his parents’ footsteps and did not become a musician. And this, despite the fact that nature endowed him with a wonderful inclination - absolute pitch.

Now he is sure that at first the war prevented him from extending the musical dynasty. He still remembers how Saratov was bombed, where they moved, and how he and his mother went to combat units with concert brigades. But after the end of the war, something else got in the way. Reznik Henry Markovich, whose photo can often be seen on the pages of glossy publications, once asked his mother why he was not taught music when he grew up a little. His mother told him that Henry was too restless as a child. It was difficult for him to sit down at the instrument. And the situation was not very good: in the two rooms of the communal apartment where he spent his childhood, until the end of the forties, seven more relatives lived (besides Henry himself and his parents) - grandmother, aunt, brother and sister of dad with two children. And a little later the boy was visited by “jumping ability”.

His sporting achievements

From a very young age, Reznik Henry actively participated in many sports competitions. At the age of fifteen, he became the champion of the Russian Federation in high jump (at that time Henry was a member of the team of younger boys). A year later, Reznik played for the adult national teams of his hometown in volleyball and basketball. Two years later, he was one of the founders of the volleyball team in Tashkent, and was also its head. Also at that same time, Reznik became the absolute record holder in high jumps in Kazakhstan. And in the fifties of the last century, the future Soviet lawyer Reznik Henry Markovich was already a member of the volleyball and basketball teams.

From Moscow to Tashkent

Along with his craving for sports, Reznik’s interest in journalism arose. But immediately after receiving his school certificate in 1956, he fails to conquer the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University due to the fact that Henry missed only one point in the entrance exams. And for one year he becomes a student at the Institute of Physical Education, where at the same time, for the purpose of insurance, he took exams. Lawyer Reznik Henry Markovich, whose biography is not as well known as his other colleagues, was quite ambitious even in those years. That’s why it seemed to him then that his volleyball career was not going the way he had imagined.

Reznik was taken to the team of MAI masters. It seemed like luck, but Henry Markovich was in the reserves, and he was almost not allowed onto the site. He was sure that he was being bullied and not allowed to express himself, because he jumped quite high and hit the ball with a good swing.

A year later, in 1957, Reznik, in company with equally ambitious peers, decided to leave the capital and create his own strong team in Tashkent. But again it is not possible for the young man to combine study and sports, because the specialization of a journalist there existed exclusively for representatives of Uzbek nationality. Reznik makes an important decision for himself to enroll in law school.

Against all genes

Reznik was awarded a diploma from the Faculty of Law of the Kazakh State University in 1962. At this time, he was quite seriously involved in jurisprudence, and his diploma work “On Legal Presumptions” received a high rating at the All-Union student competition and a recommendation for admission to graduate school.

Reznik Henry decided to postpone his move to Moscow for a while, because his sports career was going just fine. He begins to work in the investigative department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Kazakhstan. The new minister, who turned out to be a big fan of volleyball, helped him in this. Now Reznik is quite successfully working as an investigator, and at the same time, the volleyball team, of which he was elected captain, takes prizes in the 2nd group of the Soviet Union Championship.

Reznik always regarded these years of his life as great luck. After all, he was immediately enrolled in the Republican Investigation Department, where the most qualified and experienced investigators worked. And Henry ended up on this team solely because of volleyball. He now worked side by side with the investigative aces and tried to learn everything from them as quickly as possible. So, in just a few years, Reznik climbed the career ladder from an ordinary investigator to an investigator for especially important cases.

War with the Void

Despite the fact that lawyer Reznik Henry Markovich, whose photo is presented in the article, is quite established in his profession, he is the head of the anti-defamation activities carried out by the Russian Jewish Congress. He has a firm conviction that anti-Semitism can be seen as a kind of social background in different countries. It has historically developed that Jews are considered not such an ordinary nationality as other peoples. They seem to have been labeled, they are not always understood and accepted. Until now, people have some incomprehensible need to divide into “ours” and “not ours.”

As for Russia, here anti-Semitism has blossomed in a lush, bright flower. Henry Markovich never believed that the pogroms of Jews, as was always claimed, were not provoked by anyone. If you look at history, this happened both under Joseph Stalin and during the reign of the Tsar. Reznik is convinced that now there is no state anti-Semitism, which is a kind of policy expressed in things known to most: from limiting citizens in their rights and opportunities to their physical elimination.

Career steps

He is interested in sports, music, theater, poetry.

Lives in Moscow. Studied at the Faculty of Law of the Central Asian State University (Tashkent; 1957-1959). Graduated from the Faculty of Law of the Kazakh State University (1962; his thesis “On Legal Presumptions” was awarded at the all-Union student competition). He graduated from full-time graduate school at the All-Union Institute for the Study of the Causes and Development of Crime Prevention Measures of the USSR Prosecutor's Office (1969). Candidate of Legal Sciences (1969; dissertation topic: “Evaluation of evidence based on internal conviction in Soviet criminal proceedings”). Professor of the Department of Advocacy at the Moscow State Law Academy named after. O.E.Kutafina.

Lawyers have a big gathering today. A chain of events dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the creation of the legal profession opens. Leading defense attorneys are making suggestions on how to enhance competition and achieve equality between the parties in the trial. Henry Reznik, President of the Moscow Bar Association, expressed his views.

Henry Markovich, hand on heart, is a lawyer a real defender in a trial or a decorative figure of democratic justice? Has it been possible to achieve equality of rights between the prosecution and defense, as prescribed by our Constitution?

Henry Resnick: Of course not. It failed because in professional courts, and this is a bad legacy, the judges have the following attitude: not the presumption of innocence, but the presumption of the reliability of the preliminary investigation materials. And it is extremely difficult to achieve acquittal in court, because negative facts are not subject to positive proof. It can be proven that a person committed a crime. But it is possible to prove that he did not commit it only in rare cases, when, for example, there is an impeccable alibi.

That’s what a lawyer is for, to smash the prosecution’s arguments during a judicial investigation, if they are incorrect, and to present, as they say, the bare truth.

Henry Resnick: In life, it turns out that the central stage of our legal proceedings is not the trial, but the preliminary investigation. It goes on for many months, an indictment with a large number of volumes is being compiled. The initial intention of the court to rewrite the indictment arises. Sometimes the sentence is almost indistinguishable... This is not the attitude of the lawless, here we have a bad inheritance. In Soviet times, the Criminal Procedure Code set the same tasks for operational workers, investigators, prosecutors and judges - they all had to initiate criminal cases, solve crimes, and expose the perpetrators. And this accusatory attitude has not disappeared.

Among lawyers, and not only in the legal community, they are expressing the idea of completely abolishing the preliminary investigation, giving the lawyer broader rights and making a real judicial investigation. This design exists in European countries.

Henry Resnick: It's a difficult question. I am for a judicial investigation. But such drastic changes are hardly possible now. We need to overcome the accusatory bias and expand the jurisdiction of jury courts. They are the ones who can break the biased approach, which, alas, is characteristic of professional judges, and not only ours. All of us, professionals, have a blurred eye. The process is like a conveyor belt, and we are constantly in it. It seems to me that the goal should be this: to achieve a new quality in the preliminary investigation, to remove from it the disgrace of fabricating ordered cases and extorting testimony.

Jury trials still consider a limited number of cases. Are your hopes too high for them?

Henry Resnick: If we recall the concept of judicial reform, it was assumed that jury trials would consider all cases of crimes in which the punishment was more than five years. And the most interesting thing is that the judicial community initially accepted the jury trial very well. Do you know what motivation is?

In which case it wasn’t me, it was they who made this decision?..

Henry Resnick: Absolutely correct. It may be primitive, but the judges were somehow liberated. The best judges became jury judges. And then its jurisdiction began to narrow. When criminal cases of terrorism were excluded, espionage, treason, and mass riots were also removed from this case. And just recently they removed bribery, which is really interesting. It would seem that jury trials will severely punish corrupt officials, because there is social hatred from people on the street.

But another picture emerged there. Indeed, according to statistics, approximately 20 percent of cases involving qualified bribes were acquitted by the jury...

Henry Resnick: Do you know why? Because the fabrication of cases and the provocation of a bribe were revealed. And it turned out that all this was almost put on stream. The jury trial has become a bone in the throat of our law enforcement officers. There the presumption of innocence really operates and doubts are interpreted in favor of the accused. It is enough to compare convictions and acquittals in professional courts and in jury trials.

I wonder what the situation is with jury verdicts in other countries?

Henry Resnick: There were surveys in America on the verdicts handed down by juries, in the same form as ours. In about 25 percent, professional judges disagreed with the jury on their assessment of the evidence. But there is a categorical ban on the overturning of sentences if they are decided by a jury.

We are not Anglo-Saxons, we have a slightly different system of law.

Henry Resnick: Here's the situation. And in tsarist Russia, when discussing judicial reform, voices were heard that such a system was unacceptable for us. But then they decided that it was very important for Russia to show the absolute trust of the authorities in the people. And separate the establishment of facts and give this right to jurors. Imagine, jury trials in this format are now popular in Europe, introduced, for example, in Spain. For post-totalitarian states, the classical form of jury trial is very important.

How do you feel about the idea of extending jury trials to civil cases, and in general, how do you look at the prospects for its development?

Henry Resnick: I look sad. But I believe that the absolutely correct provisions of the concept of judicial reform must be implemented. In one part of it, we went in the right direction - we introduced a special procedure for considering cases, which is already considering 60 percent of cases. This is a trend that is very developed in America and Western Europe, where there is no dispute on the merits of the charges between the parties.

We have a big, but different debate. They persuade the person: confess, make a deal with the investigation and get the minimum. The poor fellow agrees and sits down, and then it turns out that he had nothing to do with it at all. But this is a separate topic.

Henry Resnick: This is a separate topic, but we are talking about something else - if there is no dispute on the merits of the charge, then a simplified procedure is possible. If there is a dispute, then the consideration should be given to a jury trial. The number of such cases where innocent people plead guilty are isolated cases. But I will tell you what you are right about. He is charged with committing a crime, and, in general, it is proven. And then they tell him: you know, my friend, we will make a deal, but you take on a couple more undisclosed ones... That's right, statistics are needed.

In past centuries, eminent lawyers were famous for their eloquence. Is oratory needed now by a defender?

Henry Resnick: What sits in the judge's chair is not a lawless person, not a sadist, not a fanatic. Initially, he is determined to solve the case objectively. But we, the defense side, need to make more efforts so that he hears us. I tell lawyers this all the time. I can say that there were cases when my speeches in court changed the course of the process.

Does eloquence or good knowledge of the laws help you win cases?

Henry Resnick: Determines the moral position of the defense attorney in the case, its justification and the ability to convince the court that the evidence presented confirms the position of the defense. But there are cases in which there are subtleties and nuances, where it is necessary to analyze the circumstances, involve the precedents of the European Court, clarifications of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court. And in order to be listened to, you should not chew, and in order not to chew, you need to prepare.

In high-profile cases, sometimes it is not yet known what a person is accused of, but the lawyer speaks loudly on camera about his innocence. How do you feel about such cases?

Henry Resnick: We wince. This is not professional. This is acceptable when the prosecution goes to the press first, declares that guilt has been proven and begins to paint a negative picture of the accused. The lawyer must, of course, answer this. In general, defense is a response to accusations. Here everything is decided by professionalism and a certain taste.

Lawyers are now increasingly participating in debates, and some have become regulars on various television shows. This is fine?

Henry Resnick: Here we need to separate. The legal profession as a professional community should under no circumstances be politicized. She is a professional civil society legal institute. Of course, a lawyer has the right to freedom of opinion, he can join political parties. But by doing this you are narrowing your professional space. How to defend a representative of another party, with different views? I believe that an individual lawyer should not become politicized.

There has long been a saying: a good lawyer is not one who knows the law well, but who knows the judge well. Corruption again?

Henry Resnick: I already said once: as long as judges take bribes, lawyers will take them. There was and is corruption in the courts of general jurisdiction, but it is greatly exaggerated. The preliminary investigation is more corrupt. We call such lawyers “collectors”; they disgrace the community, but, unfortunately, they still exist.

Are you fighting them?

Henry Resnick: How to conduct it? At one time I was a researcher at the Institute of the Prosecutor's Office, we studied bribery. Only 3 percent of bribes become known, and 97 percent are latent. I always tell the heads of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, prosecutors, and investigators: look at your archives for rejected and dismissed cases. And you will see, for some reason, in all these cases there are one or two lawyers. Why do people under investigation from such and such an investigator come to them? This means that from the very beginning the investigator or investigator says to the person: I can help you if you hire this particular lawyer. And through him, relationships are improved. We don't have access to these cases. Unfortunately, they can't hear me.

I don’t remember a time when you didn’t take your colleague under protection when complaints arose. Are they sinless or corporate solidarity?

Henry Resnick: I can say responsibly: the principle of mutual responsibility and “we don’t give up our own” has never been and is not in effect at the Moscow Bar Association. If we find out that the client was deceived, the lawyer took the money but did nothing, or fooled the client, or entered into an agreement without any possibility of success in the first place, we decisively get rid of them. Over the past year, qualification commissions reviewed approximately 200 cases and found about half to be justified.

And were they punished?

Henry Resnick: Depending on the severity of the violation, we impose one of three penalties: a reprimand, a warning about non-compliance with the status, and termination of the status.

By terminating your status, you excommunicate a person from his profession and deprive him of a piece of bread.

Henry Resnick: This must be understood. But here another question arises. We are ending the status, but the current shameful situation with the provision of legal assistance in the country is not regulated at all. In civil cases, anyone can provide assistance. And those whom we expel are established as entrepreneurs and continue to fool people’s heads without any threat of being brought to any responsibility. This is a huge problem. But we still hope that the idea of uniting the legal community on the principles of the legal profession will be realized.

The corporation celebrates the 150th anniversary of the establishment of the legal profession. The events are held under the motto: “Compulsion to justice.” Who do lawyers intend to coerce and how?

Henry Resnick: I don’t know who came up with it, but the judicial reform was carried out by the will of Tsar-Liberator Alexander II. The decree made a decision “to create a just, speedy, merciful court, to establish the independence of the judiciary and respect for the law, without which the people’s well-being is impossible.” Given the resistance of that time regarding jury trials and the legal profession, the reform was a kind of coercion towards fair justice.

What events are planned as part of the anniversary program?

Henry Resnick: A press conference will be held on Monday, a gala reception on Tuesday, and flowers will be laid at the monument to Alexander II near the Cathedral of Christ the Savior on Wednesday. Then the events will move to St. Petersburg, where the capital was in 1864 and the Judicial Charter was adopted. True, the 150th anniversary of the Judicial Reform with all its institutions is being celebrated, but it turns out that only we are celebrating. This gives rise to certain thoughts.

Anatoly Kucherena, lawyer, member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation:

Your word, attorney at law

“One of the reasons for the disastrous state of our legal proceedings is that the persons involved in cases are, for the most part, people of very dubious morality, who do not have any legal knowledge, either theoretical or practical.” This conclusion was made by the State Council during the judicial reform of 1864, initiated by Emperor Alexander II. And he recognized the need to create a legal profession, without which “it will be impossible to conduct competition in civil and judicial debates in criminal proceedings in order to reveal the truth and present a full defense before the court.”

Thus a fundamentally new legal profession was born, which was represented by two categories: the highest - sworn attorneys and the lowest - private attorneys. According to the famous lawyer A.F. Kony, in the new court, with the participation of sworn attorneys, law became “a force to which the rich and powerful of this world must yield, unless they had the same right on their side.” This is the ideal of a fair trial.

Has independent advocacy taken place in the new, today's Russia? In my opinion, it happened. And this is, perhaps, one of the few institutions that actually effectively resists arbitrariness and lawlessness. It has always been the case that certain officials try to get their hands on the lawyer. The only question is whether the lawyer himself is able to resist these attempts. I dare to say: if a lawyer is guided only by the law, conscience and interests of his client, he will not be “broken” either by the criminal world, or by some selfish law enforcement officers, or by civil servants of even the highest rank.

Of course, as the famous literary hero said, “man is mortal, and suddenly mortal at that”: a lawyer can be destroyed as a kind of biological unit, and such cases, to our common misfortune, do occur. But he cannot be made a submissive executor of someone else’s evil will. If a lawyer’s rights to defense in criminal cases are violated, this is a serious call for the entire legal community. Such persons must be held accountable.

Legal practice is a special culture, and like any culture it is strong and fruitful due to its reliance on traditions and continuity. Any “breaks” in this continuity, such as what happened in our country during the years of totalitarian dictatorship, are destructive for this culture. Fortunately, it is never too late to return to the roots and “try on” those moral and professional criteria that were established in the legal community after the greatest of all reforms of Alexander II - the judicial one.

Hasan Mirzoev, Rector of the Russian Academy of Advocacy and Notariat, Doctor of Law, Professor:

Don't promise controversial success

According to popular opinion, lawyers should be divided into two informal categories. The first are the so-called solvers, that is, lawyers who often have poor professional training and a poorly developed legal awareness, but, having a wide range of connections, know with whom and for what money they can resolve the problems that arise with clients. The second category consists of lawyers who can qualitatively prepare the necessary procedural documents, take an active part in court hearings and investigative actions, but are not always able to meet the high expectations of the client, that is, win the case with absolute success.

It is no secret that corruption also exists in the law enforcement sphere. While providing legal assistance to their clients, other lawyers enter into not only narrow professional relationships with individual officials, but also shadow relationships—corrupt ones. How to counter this? The Law on the Bar prohibits the secret cooperation of a lawyer with bodies carrying out operational investigative activities. And the Code of Professional Ethics for Lawyers proclaims that the law and morality in the defense profession are above the will of the client and none of his wishes, requests or instructions can be fulfilled if they lead to non-compliance with the law. The code formulates the main requirements and prohibitions in the activities of a lawyer. A lawyer has no right to promise a positive result to the client if it cannot be achieved only by conscientiously fulfilling his duties. He should not impose his assistance on persons and make them his clients, using personal connections with judicial and law enforcement officials, promising to resolve the case in other unworthy ways. For failure to comply with the requirements of the law and the Code of Professional Ethics, a lawyer must be held accountable, up to and including disbarment. In this way, our legal community gets rid of unscrupulous and unworthy colleagues.

Studied at the Faculty of Law of the Central Asian State University (Tashkent; 1957-1959). Graduated from the Faculty of Law of the Kazakh State University (1962; his thesis “On Legal Presumptions” was awarded at the all-Union student competition).

He graduated from full-time graduate school at the All-Union Institute for the Study of the Causes and Development of Crime Prevention Measures of the USSR Prosecutor's Office (1969). Candidate of Legal Sciences (1969; dissertation topic: “Evaluation of evidence based on internal conviction in Soviet criminal proceedings”). Professor of the Department of Advocacy at the Moscow State Law Academy named after. O. E. Kutafina.

Since 1985 - lawyer of the Moscow City Bar Association (MGCA). He recalled the reasons for engaging in advocacy as follows:

“My transition to the legal profession was connected with the “pogrom” of the Moscow Bar in 1985. The lawyers were accused of inciting bribes or fraudulently taking client money. More and more criminal cases were being prepared. This massacre was called “Karataevism” after investigator Vladimir Karataev, who led a specially created investigative group. The leadership of the Moscow Collegium invited me to take part in the defense, as an independent person “from the outside”, who at the same time has a name in legal circles.”

Since 1990 - member of the presidium, since May 1997 - chairman of the presidium of the MGCA. Since November 2002 - Chairman of the Moscow Bar Association. Vice-President of the Federal Union of Lawyers of Russia, Vice-President of the International Union (Commonwealth) of Lawyers. Director of the Institute of Advocacy of the International Union (Commonwealth) of Lawyers. Head of the Department of Advocacy at the Law University at the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences. He was awarded the gold medal named after F. N. Plevako (1998) for high professional excellence and contribution to the development of the Russian legal profession, and the Honorary Badge “Public Recognition” (2000) for active human rights activities and contribution to the development of the independent legal profession.

Ex-president and member of the Council of the Moscow Bar Association. Member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation. Vice-President of the International and Federal Unions of Lawyers, member of the Moscow Helsinki Group. Member of the Council for Improving Justice under the President of the Russian Federation.

Member of the Moscow City Bar Association since 1985, Chairman of its Presidium since 1997. Before joining the legal profession, he worked as an investigator, research assistant, and taught.

Specialization: criminal law and criminal procedure, defamation and business reputation, intellectual property, entrepreneurship.

Henry Markovich Reznik is a candidate of legal sciences, an honored lawyer of Russia. He was awarded the gold medal named after F. N. Plevako (1998) for high professional excellence and contribution to the development of the Russian legal profession, and the Honorary Badge “Public Recognition” (2000) for active human rights activities and contribution to the development of the independent legal profession.

Author of about 200 scientific, popular science and journalistic works on legal issues. Reznik Henry Markovich is a professor at the Department of Advocacy and Notariat at the Moscow State Law Academy named after O.E.

Kutafina.

Reznik Henry Markovich is one of the founders of the law firm “Reznik, Gagarin and Partners”.

Reviews about the lawyer

Kuznetsov Boris Avramovich, lawyer

First class lawyer. One of the best in Russia.

Attention! All reviews on the site are moderated. Reviews containing spam, insults, false information or violating site rules will be rejected.

Question: Thank you very much for your answer and for the extremely important detail regarding the duration of the trip, no more than a month. I just now (October 15) left for Russia (as part of my 72 days in 2013) to sign an important contract in Moscow, which is to take place on November 10. Without knowing this detail, I booked a ticket returning to Israel on November 17, i.e. I will be here for more than a month for two days. I'm ready to change my flight date. On the day of departure and on the day of arrival, am I considered to be in Israel or not? If so, can I fly to Israel on November 16th? If not, then I will have to postpone an important meeting without having time to return from Moscow to St. Petersburg in order to fly out on the 15th, which is extremely inconvenient. Sorry for taking up so much of your time.

Lawyer's response: Don’t worry, you can be absent until the end of November without losing benefits (read my previous answer carefully, it talks about calendar months, i.e. the entire month of departure and the entire subsequent month, i.e. in your case, all of October and all of November) .

Question: Dear lawyer Reznikov! Thank you very much for your informative and prompt response. I understood your answer as follows: I can refuse ashlamat akhnas and, without fear of deprivation of insurance for free services in Israel and continuing to receive kitsvat zikna, stay outside Israel for less than 183 days a year, traveling within this duration any number of times?

Lawyer's response: Yes, please note, however, that in case of a long trip abroad (more than a month), the old-age benefit for a repatriated pensioner (kitzvat zikna meyuhedet) is paid only for the calendar month of departure from Israel and one subsequent calendar month, so to maintain the benefit, try to avoid long trips.

Question: I am a new repatriate, a 75-year-old pensioner who has received old-age benefits in Bituach Leumi. Will my insurance be canceled if I exceed the number of times I leave Israel or the number of days (72) spent outside Israel. I still have a small business in Russia, which often requires my personal presence in Moscow. Can I give up my monthly old-age benefit (but not my insurance) or even pay Leumi tax as if I had worked until retirement in Israel in order to increase the number of days allowed outside of Israel (without losing my insurance)?

Lawyer's response: 1. You can voluntarily refuse to receive old-age benefits (kitzvat zikna pension) in Israel, although this will not always be the right decision for a frequently traveling pensioner. 2. The 72 days you mentioned do not refer to the old-age benefit (kitzvat zikna), but to the so-called social allowance (ashlamat akhnasa), which, of course, can also be waived. 3. If you refuse to receive benefits, you can (and should!) pay your own insurance premiums to the Israeli Institute of National Insurance (bituach leumi) on account of the state health care tax (mas shave, also known as “insurance kupat holim”). 4. The number of trips abroad does not affect insurance and the right to medical care in Israel, however, absence from Israel for more than 183 days in a calendar year may lead to loss of resident status (toshavut) and, accordingly, loss of the right to free medical care in Israel as part of kupat cholim, even despite regular payment of dues in Bituah Leumi.

Question: Hello.

Help me choose, please. My dad has been an Israeli citizen through his wife for 8 years. I have been living in Sweden illegally for 5 years with my little daughter and I have a choice: go to a shelter here and try to get legalized or go home to Ukraine and from there to Israel - do I have a chance to get legalized there over time? Dad is not Jewish. Thank you.

Lawyer's response: Unfortunately, you will not be able to stay in Israel “following your father.” In your case, you can become legalized in Israel only by getting married (or living together in a “civil marriage”) with a citizen or permanent resident of Israel.

Question: Please tell me! I am married to an Israeli, there was a chuppah, and the marriage is confirmed in Israel in Rabanut. I am Jewish myself, but my husband and I do not live in Israel, so I did not repatriate. Now we are thinking about obtaining Israeli citizenship for me and the children. Can this be done in an expedited manner if I am the wife of an Israeli who has the right to repatriation herself?

Lawyer's response: Obtaining Israeli citizenship in an accelerated manner can only be done directly in Israel itself (at the consulate this will take many months, or even years). It is not necessary to be in Israel during the registration process; you will only need to come to Israel 3 times for several days. After obtaining citizenship, it is also not necessary to reside permanently in Israel - the acquired Israeli citizenship remains for life, regardless of the country of actual residence.

Question: Hello, I need a visitor visa to the USA (the one for 10 years). I am 27 years old, married and have two small children, can I get this visa and what is the best way to do it?

Lawyer's response: Information on the process of obtaining a 10-year visitor/tourist/business visa to the United States for Israelis can be obtained on the website of the American consulate. If any problems arise, we will be happy to help.

Question: I am interested in whether an Israeli employer can legalize my stay in the country if I want to come to Israel as a tourist and stay to work there???

Lawyer's response: It is almost impossible to obtain a work visa while already in Israel. Legalization directly in Israel itself is possible only through Jewish lineage or through marriage/cohabitation with an Israeli citizen.

Biography

Born on May 11, 1938 in Leningrad, into a family of musicians. Father - Reznik Mark Izrailevich (1905-1969), worked as rector of the Saratov Conservatory, head of the cultural department of the Saratov regional committee of the CPSU, director of the music school of the Zavodsky district of Saratov. Mother - Rafalovich Mirra Grigorievna (born 1910), taught piano at the Saratov Conservatory. His wife, Larisa Yulianovna Lvova, worked as a lawyer. Son - Fr. Lvov Andrey Genrievich (born 1967), Orthodox priest. Grandchildren: Savva, Varvara, Serafima, Ekaterina, Sophia.

“My mother answered that I was restless, it was difficult to sit me down at the instrument, and the environment for learning was not conducive to learning - in two rooms of the communal apartment where I spent my childhood, until the end of the 1940s, several more people evacuated from Leningrad and Ukraine were housed , - grandmother, aunt, father’s brother and sister with two children.”

In 1957, Reznik and several other ambitious peers, stuck on the benches in capital teams, decided to leave Moscow and create their own team in one of the union republics. The choice fell on Tashkent. But combining sports and studying to become a journalist again fails. At the Central Asian State University, the specialization of a journalist exists only for people of local Uzbek nationality, and Reznik decides to enroll in the Faculty of Law. “I thought that if I really have a literary gift, I’ll write like that,” recalls Reznik. The volleyball team created in Tashkent fails to achieve its goal of becoming one of the finalists at the 1959 Spartakiad of the Peoples of the USSR. Henry is invited to Alma-Ata. Here he stands at the origins of the creation of the Almaty “Dorozhnik”: Reznik is the captain of the team, which later, without him, will become the champion of the Soviet Union. Henry also becomes the champion and record holder of Kazakhstan in high jump. “At some competitions I even competed with the great Valery Brumel - we stormed the same height, 2 meters. The difference was small - he started from this height, and I finished there,” Reznik jokingly recalls.

But the sport doesn’t let him go either - after all, he’s still only 24 years old, his jumping ability hasn’t dropped yet, the university volleyball team, of which he is the captain, is playing better and better. And Reznik postpones his return to Russia, going to work in the investigative department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Kazakhstan. The new minister, a big fan of volleyball, accepts his condition - to enroll university graduates - volleyball players - into the ministry staff. The volleyball team of the Kazakh “Dynamo” makes waves throughout the country, losing only to its Muscovite teammates, and takes prizes in the 2nd group of the USSR championship, and Reznik successfully combines sports with the work of an investigator. He evaluates this period of his life as great success: “I was immediately enrolled in the republican investigative department. The most experienced, qualified investigators worked there, having previously worked for many years locally - in cities and districts. I ended up “at the top” only thanks to volleyball - no experience in investigative work at all! But this, paradoxically, was luck. Unlike other graduates who were assigned to lower investigative departments and stewed for a long time “in their own juice,” I found myself next to the aces of the investigation and could learn from them every day. With special gratitude I remember the highest professionals Viktor Kopeliovich and Yuri Maltsev, who became my teachers.” Over the course of 4 years, Henry Reznik went from an ordinary investigator to an investigator for particularly important cases, investigating more than one major criminal case.

In 1966, Reznik entered full-time graduate school at the All-Union Institute for the Study of the Causes and Development of Crime Prevention Measures of the USSR Prosecutor's Office, 3 years later he graduated from it, having defended his Ph.D. thesis, and remained to work at the same institute as a research assistant. In the mid-1960s - early 1970s, the All-Union Institute of the USSR Prosecutor's Office was rightfully considered the center of scientific thought in the field of criminal legal disciplines. Outstanding scientists worked there - Igor Ivanovich Kirnets, Vladimir Nikolaevich Kudryavtsev, Boris Sergeevich Nikiforov, Ilya Davydovich Perlov, Alexey Adolfovich Gertsenzon, Vera Isaakovna Kaminskaya, Alexey Alexandrovich Eisman, Alexander Ruvimovich Ratinov, Genrikh Mikhailovich Minkovsky, Inga Borisovna Mikhailovskaya, Alexander Maksimovich Yakovlev. By the way, the institute was famous not only for its scientific seminars, but also for its famous “cabbages.” G.M. Reznik worked there until 1987. During this period, he prepared the monograph “Inner Conviction in Evaluating Evidence” (1977), and wrote the books “The Right to Defense” (1976); "When Responsibility Comes" (1979); “The Constitutional Right to Defense” (1980), dozens of articles, chapters and sections of scientific courses, commentaries and teaching aids, a number of criminological studies of crime have been conducted.

From the numerous scientific works of G.M. Reznik, according to the assessments of legal scholars and practitioners and the citation index, the following stand out more often than others: “The Personality of a Criminal: Legal and Criminological Content” (1981); “Public Opinion as a Factor in Crime Control Planning” (1982); “On the question of defining the concept of crime” (1986); "The Contradictions of Modern Urbanization and Crime" (1985); “Lawyer: the prestige of the profession” (1987). The last two works published in the central scientific journal “Soviet State and Law” (now “State and Law”) were noted as the best articles of the year.

In 1985, Reznik became a lawyer at the Moscow City Bar Association, and in 1989-91 he headed the Research Institute of Advocacy. Over the years of legal practice G.M. Reznik participated in many major trials. He defended in criminal cases the Prime Minister of Uzbekistan N. Khudayberdiev, the prosecutor of the Ochamchira region of Abkhazia V. Gurdzhua, the head of the security service of the President of the USSR General Yu. Plekhanov (in the case of the State Emergency Committee). His trustees were politician and publicist V. Novodvorskaya, pacifist conscientious objector A. Pronozin, journalists V. Poegli, A. Babitsky, O. Kitova, ecologists A. Nikitin and G. Pasko, writer V. Sorokin, famous entrepreneurs V. Ryashentsev ( case of the ANT concern), V. Gusinsky, B. Berezovsky. In civil cases, represented the interests of the President of Russia B. Yeltsin, prominent politicians and statesmen E. Gaidar, A. Chubais, A. Shokhin, writer A. Sinyavsky, cultural and artistic figures R. Rozhdestvensky, Yu. Temirkanov, N. Petrov, L. Chizhik. Having become a lawyer, G.M. Reznik continues his scientific and teaching activities. Currently, he heads the Department of Advocacy at the Law University at the Institute of State and Law of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

G.M. Reznik is the President of the Moscow Bar Association, Vice-President of the Federal Union of Lawyers of Russia, Vice-President of the International Union (Commonwealth) of Lawyers, Director of the Research Institute of Advocacy. Member of the Moscow Helsinki Group, member of the presidium of the Russian Jewish Congress, member of the presidium of the National Anti-Corruption Committee, member of the Council for the Improvement of Justice under the President of Russia. Honored Lawyer of Russia, Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor; awarded the gold medal named after F.N.

Year of issue: 1984 .
Place of publication: London.
Publisher: "OPI, London".
Number of pages: 193 .

The publication was saved by us in recognized text pdf file with a photographic image of the pages of the book. The text appears below the image and can be copied if necessary to quote from the publication.

This page has been viewed 3115 time(s).

Electronic publication prepared by: Andrey Nikitin-Perensky