Interview by Bogdan Munteanu, Photo Mihaela Matei
How hard was it to get to the current professional recognition?
I avoid clichés like the one that it was very hard and I had
days and nights working. It might be too much. I had a few major chances
throughout my professional path. The first was to pass the exam at the
University of Law in 1989, a second chance – to grow up in the military service
with an exceptional group of friends and a third – to be a member of the first
generation that started right after the fall of communism. We were the first
students who witnessed the making of the new legal system in Romania. Fourth,
we had a great chance to start law in a time when it was virgin territory. In
1993, when I started, very few people knew what business law was. I counted on
my fingers the people who knew where the profession was heading to and these
were rather visionaries. A fifth chance was to start my career near one of
those visionaries: Gheorghe Muşat. Then, in a chronological order, I had the
chance to take the decision to start my own company in 2005 with a team of
highly competent people. Our decision coincided with a very good state of the
economy. Regarding my income, it saddens me that it ends up being subject of
gossip. I declare how much I earn, but do not want to dwell on this subject.
About anyone who achieved remarkable results we presume
that they do something different than their competitors. What have you done
different from other law firms?
Above all, we are a team that shares the values of the same
generation. All my partners are people under 43 years. I am, as they call me
Tetea, the old man, being 44. It’s a young team, but I wouldn’t emphasize youth
but rather the fact that we are formed at the same school. Secondly, we tried
to cultivate the spirit of real partnership.Then we focused to bring something
new and spectacular in our industry. What did we bring new in the industry? For
example, I evoke the latest thing we’ve done. Recently we realized that we have
reached a point where we are very focused
on laws, regulations, ontracts, clients,
money, business; I said maybe it’s time to talk about something else. This is
why, I recently started within the company a series of conferences or chats
different than so-called team building, seminars, conferences and internal
training sessions. We invited every two weeks a personality from the cultural
elite to be our moderator. Horia Patapievici was the first; in the second
session it was director Cristian
Mungiu, then Emil Hurezeanu, and this evening (31th October)
– Andrei Pleşu. The idea was very popular with my teammates and the audience is
very good. The public consists of our colleagues, our customers and our
friends. It is an informal meeting which involves enjoying a pint with someone
who challenges us. Professional success was probably also the result of life lessons.
Which of these might be of use to anyone, in
any field other than law? I do not know if I can offer life
lessons, but I recall two examples which are probably illustrative of the
differences between my generation and the generation now. I in the bin. It might be conservative, but if
this is the candidate’s interest in his profession… The second example relates
with the time when I was an intern and I had a football accident. I was in the
hospital, after having a surgery, and I found out that we had a new foreign
client. I said „I want that client” and when I went out of the hospital, the
taxi dropped me off in front of the office, which was on the eighth floor in
Piaţa Victoriei. The elevator was out of order and I had climb eight floors with
crutches. I reached the office exhausted and I said „I will solve the case of
the new client” Today the answer is: “work-life balance”. No blame, but there
are some major differences. The main concern of the young lawyer today is to
have the best of both worlds. They want a good job, money and weekends starting
Friday morning.
How do you reconcile professional life with your duties
as a father and your passion for sport?
I must be very honest. I had difficult years in 2005- 2010
and I dedicated them solely to building a successful business. It was a hard
takeoff, but I’d be lying to say that now there is the same pressure. We
reached 10,000 feet, the plane can be put on autopilot and we can have a cup
of coffee on board. I have time for life. In my case, it means concern for the
career and the future of my children. I also write from time to time and I
would like to return to the University to teach and to do more sport. Regarding
my skills as a tennis player, I run like crazy, but I have no talent.
Decades ago, great lawyers were also political and
cultural personalities. Is there any hope that nowadays a successful lawyer
will have something to say in society, to change things for the better?
I fear that his chances are minimal. I am not referring to a
particular political orientation, but the whole political system is affected
by a crisis, almost everywhere in the world. I think we need to restore the law
to the place it deserves. The law system in Romania is very mistreated in all
places: in the courts, the parliament, in public debates or TV studios, everyone
is competent in law. Once a competent lawyer tries to explain something, he is
already accused of using tricks. The law is in a state of unconsciousness and
is not really taken seriously. A first solution to heal the system would be
granting the law system more than a pompous title like the state of law. You
have to prove that you care about the rules of the state of law. Secondly, I
believe that the remedy does not lie in the effort of an individual lawyer even
if competent, but in a competent effort of the elite. I don’t know who should
gather this elite. But for the good of this country there would need to be a
time and a place for the expression of an elitist, collective, resonant and
firm voice.
How does a renowned lawyer perceive the label applied to
Romania: ‘‘corrupt country, corrupt justice?”
Romania is not a pathological case. It does not sit well in
terms of image of the honesty of the government, magistrates and authorities,
but we are not at the top. There are real, legitimate charges, but there are
also many preconceptions born out of the pursuit of sensationalism by the
media. I often saw speculations like „this judge has a house in Snagov so he is
obviously corrupt”. The rush for the sensational is understandable up to a
point. Beyond that point it drives you crazy. When you say that a politician
or a judge is honest, there’s no story for the media. Returning to the
question, yes, I think the level of corruption in Romania is higher than in
Sweden and is lower than Ukraine, but the idea that others are bigger thieves
than us is not a delight for me.
Any idea how to bring art and authentic values in public
space and replace superficiality and trivia?
Florentin Țuca: Your question is very interesting because
it puts on the table a glass half full, half empty. The empty half is more
visible and it is the invasion of the hamburger, commercial film, cheap
broadcast entertainment not to evoke the vulgarity of tabloids. However, the
bright side is that we have a chance. There are still, in the cultural space
and public space voices of good quality and real impact. A recent example: the
Cannes Film Festival in Bucharest was a great success which is encouraging.
Would you consider yourself a Mecena? What should an
artist do, to convince you to help him ?
Our company decided to develop a program, within the limits
of a budget, to support three directions. The first direction is the
charitable, the second is the support for elite and third – support for
education and culture. I do not want to talk about charity, I want to ensure
their anonymity. Most often there are medical cases. In segment two, I can
evoke the support we give to the national mathematics team participating in
international contests. I think we, Romanians, are brilliant in mathematics,
music and IT. In segment three is culture and education: we sponsored the
Enescu Festival, Celibidache Foundation and the recent Cannes Festival à
Bucarest .
Are you happy Mr. Ţuca?
No. For several reasons. First, I constantly raise the bar higher and higher and until the moment I pass it, I am in a state of unhappiness. Secondly, I’m pretty strict in interpreting happiness. If happiness means to be the leader of a prosperous law company – yes, I’m happy. If happiness means to have two wonderful children – yes, I’m happy. If it means that you can play tennis at 44, you can read a book and understand it – yes. But if someone told me they are happy, I would become very suspicious. Maybe I’m pessimistic, but I find it hard to say loudly “yes”. I like to think that I can taste various forms of happiness and be marked by different types of unhappiness.
“The young lawyers today want a good job, money and weekends starting Friday morning.”
