Russian Legal Reforms and Dostoevsky

The Russian Judicial System: Pre-Reform

The structural inequality of the Russian justice system was so egregious that liberal writer Alexander Herzen highlighted:

The disorder, brutality, arbitrariness, and corruption of the Russian court [is enough that] . . . a man brought to trial fears not the punishment of the court, but the trial. He looks forward to being sent to Siberia (Conlon 9).

The pre-reform judicial system was class discriminatory. Serfs, who comprised more than a third of the population, did not have access to courts (Conlon 10). Privileged Russians who did have access faced an inquisitorial system based on document review. This was inconvenient and impractical, especially since the majority of the population was illiterate (Conlon 10). It was inefficient, with suits lasting up to 12 years (Conlon 10). This was exacerbated by incompetent and corrupt judges; many were only taught to administer the law, not interpret, analyze, or change it (Conlon 11). Additionally, the criminal justice process functioned on the presumption of guilt and confession as the best proof of guilt, even though torture could be used to obtain confessions (Conlon 11). Coupled with the inquisitorial system, this entrenched existing social hierarchies and left no recourse or ability to defend oneself for the accused (Conlon 12).

Legal Reform of 1864

Following the 1861 emancipation of the serfs, it became clear that the newly liberated Russian masses needed a justice system that recognized them as such. After Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War, Tsar Alexander II  restructured Russian society via a series of reforms. Arguably his most successful reform was that of the judicial system, initiated on November 20, 1864, when he proclaimed:

To install in Russia fast, just, and merciful courts, equal for all Our subjects, to heighten judicial power, to give it the necessary independence and, in general, to strengthen in Our people the respect for law without which public prosperity is impossible, and which must serve as a permanent guide for the actions of all and everybody, from the person of the highest to that of the lowest rank (Kucherov 78).

He revolutionized the court system by introducing public oral trials (replacing the lengthy inquisitorial procedure), an independent judiciary, and trial by jury for criminal cases where peasants could serve as jurors (Kucherov 78). The introduction of the jury was the greatest innovation because most of the popular participation judicial power was previously in the hands of appointed corrupt officials (Kucherov 82). These changes accelerated progress toward a westernized system, marking a limitation of autocracy and the triumph of equality over years of persecution.

The Legal System in Dostoevsky's Works

Under the old system, criminal cases that were of concern to the Tsar were often tried in front of military tribunals that delivered harsher penalties than the criminal courts (Conlon 12). Dostoevsky experienced this egregious process when he was tried for his involvement in the Petrashevsky circle (Conlon 12). Despite this and the success of the new courts, Dostoevsky still criticized the new system in his work. Of his works written pre-reform, he directly expounds his view on the pre-reform justice system in Crime and Punishment and The House of the Dead. He reflects on the judicial reforms in his post-reform works The Idiot, Demons, The Brothers Karamazov, and portions of his journalistic piece A Writer’s Diary.

There were several cases that Dostoevsky took particular interest in. He criticized four cases of domestic violence that ended in acquittal of a seemingly guilty person in A Writer’s Diary (Conlon 37). He actively intervened in one known as the Kornilova case. Dostoevsky was also fascinated by the trial of Olga Umetskaya - a 14-year-old girl who attempted to burn down her parents’ home - and intended to use it as inspiration for a character in The Idiot (Frank 246). The jury trial in The Brothers Karamazov is seen as the culmination of Dostoevsky’s legal opinion, building upon his investigations of various cases (Rosenshield 5). He explores his primary concern of the consequences for Russia of a westernized system that defines people by their relation to the law rather than their relation to Christ (Rosenshield 6).

References

Conlon, Brian. "Dostoevsky v. the Judicial Reforms of 1864: How and Why One of Nineteenth-Century Russia’s Greatest Writers Criticized the Nation’s most Successful Reform." Russian Law Journal, vol. 2, no. 4, 2015; pp. 7-62. ResearchGate, doi: 10.17589/2309-8678-2014-2-4-7-62.

Frank, Joseph. Dostoevsky: The Miraculous Years, 1865-1871. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J, 1995.

Kucherov, Samuel. "The Jury as Part of the Russian Judicial Reform of 1864." The American Slavic and East European Review, vol. 9, no. 2, 1950, pp. 77-90. JSTOR, doi:10.2307/2491600.

Rosenshield, Gary. "Introduction: Western Law, Russian Justice." Western Law, Russian Justice: Dostoevsky, the Jury Trial, and the Law, University of Wisconsin Press, 2005. Project MUSE, muse.jhu.edu/book/8611.