Attorneys or asylum seekers often contact me, as an expert-witness on Russia conditions, when the individual hearing is only weeks away. The first question is usually how long a report takes. For a report addressing two issues, the answer is typically up to four weeks, and two weeks if the case is urgent. The more useful question, though, is what the report can do for your case if it arrives early instead of at the last minute. Here is an example from one of my recent cases.
A risk no one had identified
My client was a Russian citizen in his sixties. He had acquired Soviet citizenship as a young man, shortly before the USSR collapsed. He then became a Russian citizen by recognition, because he was residing in Russia when the Soviet Union dissolved. In more than three decades he had never registered with a military enlistment office (voenkomat). Apparently everyone had forgotten about it: he had, and so had the state. That changed in 2022, when a local police officer told him to report to the voenkomat to sign a military service contract.
The case, as initially framed, centered on coerced military service and ethnic discrimination. While preparing the report, I identified a further risk that no one on the team had flagged. That is understandable, because the legal ground behind it did not exist until August 2024.
The mechanism works as follows:
- The statute. Federal Law No. 281-FZ of August 8, 2024, amended Article 22 of Federal Law No. 138-FZ "On Citizenship of the Russian Federation." Under subpoint (v), point 2, Part 1, Article 22, a person with acquired citizenship who fails to complete initial military registration is deemed, by legal fiction, to have given knowingly false information about his commitment to observe Russian law at the time he acquired citizenship. On that basis the decision granting him citizenship can be revoked.
- Who it applies to. Only citizens whose citizenship was acquired other than by birth. Citizens by birth are not exposed to this ground.
- The procedure. Revocation is administrative, not judicial. The territorial body of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) decides on the basis of a finding by the military commissariat.
- Retroactivity. Russia’s Constitutional Court has held that terminating acquired citizenship is not "deprivation" of citizenship, which the Constitution prohibits. It treats termination as a restorative measure that is not subject to the ban on retroactive application of laws that establish or aggravate liability (Ruling No. 183-O of February 11, 2021). As a result, the provision reaches people whose failure to register predates the 2024 amendment by decades.
In practice, a man who had held Russian citizenship for over thirty years now faces losing it. That threat also gives the authorities leverage to push him into signing a military contract (as an alternative to being sent to Afghanistan - citizenship by birth). Because the ground reaches only naturalized citizens, it maps directly onto the discrimination analysis. The legal characterization is, of course, counsel’s call. My role is to establish the facts and the conditions in Russia.
Because the report reached counsel well before the filing deadline, counsel was able to build this point into the legal argument. This summer, attorneys in three of my cases used findings from my reports in the same way. Had the report arrived a few days before filing, it could have served only as an exhibit.
Why the report should not be rushed
A report written under time pressure is more likely to contain errors, and an expert’s error becomes an opening for DHS on cross-examination. Your client has lived with these facts for years. I am learning them for the first time. I build in time to set a draft aside and return to it with fresh eyes. The second reading is where I find inconsistencies in dates, mismatches between the client’s declaration and the documentary record, and connections that were not visible at first.
Given how quickly Russian law and enforcement practice are changing, it may seem sensible to prepare the report closer to the hearing, as many suggest. However, I would recommend preparing a draft of the report in advance, as many of my clients do. It often helps the attorney identify additional grounds that the report may bring to light — this happens in almost every case I am involved in. An update could be done week before the deadline.
What early engagement lets you do
- Shape the questions. The report is most useful when it addresses the specific issues your theory of the case depends on: the particular social group, imputed political opinion, government acquiescence for CAT. That works best when we agree on the questions at the outset.
- Build the findings into your brief instead of attaching the report as a stand-alone exhibit.
- Prepare your client’s testimony in light of the country conditions record, so that it is consistent with the report.
- Prepare for expert testimony if the court or DHS wants to examine me.
- Keep the record current. I am now preparing reports for asylum seekers whose hearing is set for 2027-2028. He and their counsels will have a full picture by 2027. Closer to the hearing, I will provide a supplemental declaration reflecting developments in Russia. As the example above shows, Russian law changes quickly, and new risks appear where none existed before.
Scheduling
I work on several reports at a time. When multiple urgent deadlines coincide, each case gets less time than it deserves. Engaging early avoids that problem.
Do not wait for a hearing date. The best time to contact me is at intake, even before the individual hearing is scheduled. To assess the case and give you a timeline, I need the Form I-589, your client’s declaration, and the hearing date, if one has been set. Encourage your clients to reach out to me early.
