Leading legal scholars discussed proposals for reforming legal education.

On November 6, the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Education, Science, and Innovation published a draft Concept for the Development of Legal Education in Ukraine. In particular, it proposes reducing the number of law schools, eliminating the “International Law” major, and that studies in the “Law” major will be offered only at the master’s level on a full-time basis—part-time, bachelor’s, and associate’s degree programs are also proposed for elimination.

On November 5, the day before the Concept was published, an expert discussion titled “The Draft Concept for the Development of Legal Education Through the Eyes of the Professional Legal Community” was held via videoconference. Participants in the discussion included representatives from the Institute of Law and the Institute of International Relations at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, the Faculty of International Relations at Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, the Faculty of Law at Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, and the Faculty of Law at Uzhhorod National University.

Doctor of Law, President of the Ukrainian Association of International Law, retired judge of the European Court of Human Rights, and Vice President of the Academy of Sciences of Higher Education of Ukraine, Volodymyr Butkevych, emphasized in his speech that the field of legal education must include the specialty “International Law.”

He discussed in detail the history of the development of the “International Law” major in the former USSR and in Ukraine in particular. According to him, European countries began developing this major much earlier than we did.

International lawyers participated in the discussion, emphasizing that the proposal to exclude “International Law” is aimed at standardizing higher legal education. There are virtually no advantages to this approach, unless one considers it an advantage to increase the potential for imposing, on representatives of various legal schools—including the Ukrainian school of international law—the views of certain specialists regarding the “only correct” legal education.

Olena Orlyuk, Doctor of Law, Professor, and Acting Director of the Institute of Law at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, delivered a presentation titled “Continuous Master’s Program: A Step Forward or Two Steps Back?”

In her speech, she noted that a continuous master’s program (a six-year course of study leading to a master’s degree, without a bachelor’s degree) represents a return to the Soviet-style legal education system. According to her, Ukrainian legal education currently has a solid foundation and offers specialization. With the introduction of the integrated master’s program, specialization will no longer exist. She also noted that she sees a complete lack of understanding on the part of those implementing these changes.

Olena Orlyuk emphasized that the unification and standardization of legal education will lead to the loss of each law school’s unique character. At the same time, in her opinion, such changes will result in a departure from the Bologna Process and undermine academic mobility. Master’s-level education, meanwhile, will be focused solely on preparing students to take exams.

Iryna Hlovyuk, Doctor of Law, attorney, research advisor, and member of the Scientific Advisory Council at the Supreme Court, noted that legal education encompasses both the bachelor’s and master’s levels. This allows students to choose a specialization at the master’s level. A “through-and-through” master’s program, however, does not offer this option, as it will be impossible to change one’s field of study during the program.

On the topic “The Unified State Qualification Exam: Are the Stakes Too High?” Vyacheslav Komarov, Vice Rector for Academic and Methodological Affairs at the Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, and Volodymyr Burdin, Dean of the Law Faculty at the Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, delivered presentations. The speakers emphasized the risks associated with the proposal to introduce the USQE, which would lead to the standardization of master’s degree programs. The introduction of the Unified State Exam (USE) necessitates the inclusion in educational programs of components that solely “meet” the USE competency requirements, which are narrower than the full spectrum of the educational component, thereby transforming master’s degree programs into “courses preparing students for the Unified State Examination,” which in turn will erode the autonomy and responsibility of higher education institutions regarding educational (academic) qualifications.

Speaking on the topic “Other Provisions of the Draft Concept for the Development of Legal Education: A Reason for Joy or Concern?”, Stepan Hladiy, Candidate of Legal Sciences and judge of the Kyiv Court of Appeals, noted the oversaturation of the legal market in Ukraine. According to statistics, more than 100,000 people are receiving a legal education in Ukraine. In his opinion, this is far too many. Stepan Hladiy also noted the prevalence of educational institutions that are not specialized in law but are engaged in making money by training lawyers. “People have a diploma, but they lack any real education,” he said, adding that due to the large number of lawyers in the country, true specialists are unable to fulfill their potential.

During the discussion, Volodymyr Burdin, Dean of the Law Faculty at Ivan Franko National University of Lviv and Doctor of Law, highlighted the poor level of foreign language proficiency among first-year law students. According to him, instructors are forced to “fill in the gaps left by secondary school.” He emphasized that first-year instructors, instead of preparing for academic discussions, are forced to revisit the high school foreign language curriculum. Therefore, instead of focusing on specialized disciplines, universities should allocate class hours to foreign language instruction.

Participants in the expert discussion expressed a shared vision for improving the quality of higher legal education, as well as concern that the proposed changes address only form rather than content, which will have negative consequences for the quality of legal education.

Discussions on the Concept are currently ongoing. On November 11, the relevant committee will hold a hearing titled “Reforming Higher Legal Education in Ukraine: Challenges and Prospects.” According to participants in the expert discussion, this debate should continue with the involvement of a broader range of experts.