Ilya Novikov, a partner at Barristers JSC, appeared before the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in connection with Ksenia Sobchak’s lawsuit seeking to disqualify Vladimir Putin from the election.

At the Supreme Court today, during the hearing on Ksenia Sobchak’s lawsuit seeking to disqualify V. Putin from the election, everyone was entertaining themselves as best they could. The predictability of the outcome sometimes forces lawyers to seek relaxation in activities other than the debates. Three representatives of the Central Election Commission showed up wearing bow ties. They clearly wanted to make a point, and if these ties had been regular bow ties rather than bows on hooks, perhaps their message would have been clearer. At first, someone even wanted to seat them right behind Ksenia and me, so they’d have to look at our papers while we talked to them from behind. We had to discreetly remind the judge through the clerk that we do, after all, represent opposing sides, and the CEC was moved to sit across from us, behind the prosecutor.

I also allowed myself a few minor digressions. First, I pointed out that until recently, the Russian Wikipedia article on Dmitry Medvedev contained a reference to Simeon Bekbulatovich. And that history textbooks do not state that Grozny held the throne for two terms—before and after Simeon—but rather describe it as it actually was. Then, since most of our discussion revolved around the famous word “consecutive” in Part 3 of Article 81 of the Constitution, I referred to that unofficial agreement between Medvedev and Putin as a “contract for consecutive terms” (first I serve two terms in a row, then you serve one term, then I serve two in a row again). Finally, during the Q&A session