Borys Danevych: “A Significant Number of Clients Are Expecting From Lawyers Transparent Rules”
“It seems to me wrong to talk about expectations towards changing the judiciary, the prosecutor’s office, overcoming political corruption without changing the legal profession or the legal business.”
In the course of the third module, participants in the “Tomorrow’s Lawyer” Program met with Borys Danevych, a partner with Danevych.Law, co-chair of Health Committee of the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine, and founder of the Life Sciences Talks educational initiative.
Borys Danevych has been practicing law for over 16 years. Since 2008 – in a status of a law firm partner. He advises healthcare and pharmaceutical companies. He is concerned with healthcare and pharmaceutical sector reform.
In his professional activities, he advocates the legitimacy and ethics of lawyers, as well as the fight against corruption in Ukraine.
He imagines himself as a person who calmly talks about skeletons in his closet and the absence of at least one pair of black socks in it.
“Tomorrow’s Lawyer” spoke with Borys Danevych about how to develop legal practice, what is ethical and unethical for a lawyer, and why a lawyer should choose a specialization.
***
– You have been practicing since 2006, have experience as a lawyer, a partner of a law firm. Your colleagues claim that you were able to build an honest legal business. How to be honest in a law firm?
– Objectively speaking, it was an evolution for me. I did not start building an honest legal business (by the way, I do not separate the legal business and attorney practice, for me it is the only legal profession) in my student years.
For a long time, I was a hired employee, not a law firm owner. Only later have I become a partner, co-owner, founder and so on.
When it comes to the first part of my career – being a hired employee – I have not defined the rules and approaches to doing business. This does not mean that I have not had the opportunity to influence how the company develops. Although it was a foreign business, organized according to the ideas of its founders. When I became a partner for those founders, my opportunities to influence increased.
After studying in Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, and largely due to this education, being influenced by many important teachers for me, I have developed a perception of corruption. Although, when I got into the Ukrainian legal business, I faced with the fact that corruption, non-transparent taxation and other practices were a commonplace for lawyers. I was uncomfortable working in such conditions. Initially, I chose a position for myself: although I am in that environment, still I am not a part of it. There was a long evolution ahead. Gradually, I became a partner, co-owner of the business. During this journey, I made every effort to work only on honest projects from all perspectives.
The final mental transition to a legal and compliant business occurred on the eve of Maidan during the merger with Oleg Marchenko. Because of the Revolution of Dignity, there was no willingness to tolerate corruption in the country in general, and in the legal profession in particular. Then there was a willingness and a desire to influence the transition in the country to be the norm for other colleagues.
– Does the following principle work in Ukrainian realities: if you want honesty instead of corrupt practices from others (in particular, prosecutors, judges), you should go to the honest side yourself?
– I do not have a definitive answer to the question whether it is a prerequisite to influence the changes in the prosecutor’s office, the judicial system. It seems to me wrong to talk about expectations about changing the judicial system, the prosecutor’s office, overcoming political corruption without changing the legal profession or the legal business.
I am not sure that if a radical change were made in the legal profession and the legal business, it would automatically lead to the renewal of prosecutor’s office or the judicial system. These are different elements of the system, although they are closely interconnected.
– When you started working honestly, did it prevent you from communicating with colleagues who lived by other rules? Is there such a divide in the professional environment?
– No, it’s not a question of two colours – black and white. Your own perception is quite subjective. For example, at a certain stage, it seemed to me that I was doing everything right, unless I was engaged in “gross” corruption, obvious violations, but at the same time, I had the willingness to tolerate non-compliance with other requirements of the law. I somehow explained it to myself. I think for many colleagues in our country the picture is something like this: different shades of grey. Although in recent years, it is no longer uncommon to meet young colleagues who, under legal activity, mean only 100% legal activity.
Most of the colleagues I interact with, including within the framework of the “Tomorrow’s Lawyer” Program, often explain that they make particular choices because of the system, “we didn’t invent it”, “we don’t trust the state” and so on.
There are no two opposite poles in the legal community: “for” or “against” honest legal business. Most likely, the legal profession is located somewhere between these poles. Someone is more inclined to one pole, someone to another. Some may be more inclined to the legal format of doing business, but somehow find themselves in a firm that tolerates illegal business. This also happens.
I gradually came to the realization that aggressively promoting a legitimate and ethical approach creates barriers to perception rather than helping colleagues to move to the light. I remember a time when it was more difficult for me to communicate with my colleagues because of my position. Now, I percept the situation in the community easier, like a colour palette. I understand that most law practitioners genuinely believe that what they do is the best that can be afforded in Ukraine.
Full text of the interview is available at the Ukrainian web-page.
***
The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not reflect the position of the “Tomorrow’s Lawyer” Program, the Ukrainian Bar Association, the Bar Association of Legal Aid Providers, the Quality and Accessible Legal Aid in Ukraine Project, the Canadian Bureau for International Education, or the Government of Canada and the Law Enforcement Section of the United States Embassy in Ukraine.
“Tomorrow’s Lawyer” is a powerful network of lawyers uniting opinion leaders in the legal profession, who provide legal assistance in accordance with the highest ethical standards, act as agents of change in society and leaders in the professional community.
The “Tomorrow’s Lawyer” Program was launched in 2016 and first implemented within the “Quality and Accessible Legal Aid” Project, carried out by the Canadian Bureau for International Education with the support of the Government of Canada in cooperation with the Legal Aid Coordination Centre. It is currently being implemented and developed with the support of the US Embassy’s Law Enforcement Section in Ukraine, the “Tomorrow’s Lawyer” NGO, in partnership with the Ukrainian Bar Association and the Bar Association of Legal Aid Providers.
