- In Defence of Ginzburg, Orlov, Rudenko and Tykhy
- Other Letters & Statements
*
From the Ukrainian Helsinki Group
(lit. “the Ukrainian Group to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements”)
In the Ukraine the skilled folk-art craftsman, the artist and master of inlay work Pyotr Vasilevich Ruban has been sentenced [see CCE 45.3] to eight years of special-regime camps and five years of exile, and the confiscation of his property.
After serving a lengthy term of imprisonment in the Mordovian camps, he returned in 1973 to Priluki where he began to work at a furniture enterprise. In his free time, he made souvenirs which he gave to an artistic salon. In 1976 Ruban made an encrusted book out of wood as a present to the American people. On the cover was the Statue of Liberty and the inscription ‘Two Hundred Years”. This highly artistic work was stolen by unknown persons from his workshop and a criminal case was brought against the artist.
He was accused of private-enterprise activities and of misappropriating State property. Private-enterprise activities implied his delivery of souvenirs to the artistic salon, something permitted by law; State property referred to the scraps of wood which were valued by the court at 772 roubles. The witnesses did not corroborate any misappropriation, but all the same P.V. Ruban was sentenced under Article 81 (Ukrainian SSR Criminal Code), which provides for punishment for misappropriation of State property in especially large quantities.
Mykola Rudenko
Leader of the Ukrainian Group
to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements
[Evidently M. Rudenko made a mistake: Article 81 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code concerns “Misappropriation of State or public property by means of theft”, and not “Misappropriation … in especially large quantities”, Chronicle].
*
“To the World Forum of Peace-loving Forces” (13 January 1977, 18 signatures)
According to reports in the Soviet press, your Forum is “open to any forces or movements which speak out actively for peace” … Despite this, the Soviet Union is represented at the Forum by a movement of only one political and ideological orientation, by pro-government public organizations…
The authors of the appeal call on the Forum to invite the participation of Andrei Sakharov, Yury Orlov and “a deputation (3-5 people) of active participants in the Movement for Peace and Democracy inspired by Sakharov and Orlov”.
***
In Defence of Ginzburg, Orlov, Rudenko and Tikhy
Yury Mnyukh: “Don’t Allow the Liquidation of the Solzhenitsyn Fund!”
“… The KGB agencies have taken away all the public money they found [at a search on 4 January 1977 at the home of A. Ginzburg, Chronicle] to the last rouble … I am appealing for voluntary donations not only to compensate for the material losses of the fund, but even to augment it…
“I call for interventions in defence of Alexander Ginzburg, whose future fate is under threat.”
*
Roy Medvedev and Valentin Turchin: “To the Leaders of Socialist and Communist Parties in Europe”
After calling the charges brought against the Helsinki Group in a TASS report of 4 January 1977 “totally false and provocative”, the authors write that “the above-mentioned circumstances testify to the preparation of even more serious reprisals against Orlov, Ginzburg and Alexeyeva, and against members of the Ukrainian Helsinki group (Rudenko, Berdnik …)”
*
G. Rozenshtein: “To Heads of States and Governments in the Countries which Participated in the Helsinki Conference” (6 January 1977)
“Now the question stands thus: can the joint authority of the other participants in the Helsinki conference guarantee the existence of a tiny but extremely authoritative free-thinking group in the Soviet Union? …
“The members of the group are in real danger of being moved to the ‘Gulag Archipelago’ …
“Of what value will the verification of the Final Act’s implementation be, if the only people in the Soviet Union who believed in this Act are in prison?”
*
Pyotr and Zinaida Grigorenko: “Concerning the Slander against Alexander Ginzburg” (3 February 1977)
Having described Ginzburg’s the recent life and work, and the difficulties he has encountered in trying to find a job, the authors appeal to the progressive world press to speak out in his defence.
*
Andrei Sakharov and Igor Shafarevich: “In defence of Alexander Ginzburg” (4 February 1977)
The authors appeal to “everyone who agrees that the defence of human rights is essential for the preservation of peace on earth”. They write that for Alexander Ginzburg conviction will mean imprisonment in a special-regime camp. The authors fear that “the arrest of Alexander Ginzburg is a link in a chain of repressions planned with an eye on the Belgrade Conference”.
Alexander Ginzburg, 1936-2002
*
Kronid Lyubarsky: “To Heads of States and Governments in the Countries which Participated in the Helsinki Agreement” (4 February 1977)
“I appeal to you as a representative of the political prisoners held in Vladimir Prison [CCE 44.17.4]. Just a few days ago I myself was still one of them. And this gives me the moral right to speak on their behalf. I also have formal authorization from the majority of them to make statements on their behalf.
“I know what grief the Vladimir political prisoners will feel on learning of the arrest of the well-known activist of the Soviet democratic movement, Alexander Ginzburg. For several years they and their families have experienced the beneficial results of the tireless activities of Alexander Ginzburg in his capacity as manager of the Aid Fund for Political Prisoners. Scarcely anyone has done so much to alleviate the physical and moral conditions in which prisoners of conscience are held in the Soviet Union. Scarcely anyone else enjoys such deep love and respect among political prisoners. The unbounded selflessness in his work and the complete altruism of Alexander Ginzburg are widely known. Our profound respect to him for this.
“Joining the ‘Public Group to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements in the USSR’ from the moment of its inception, Alexander Ginzburg in this role, too, displayed to the full his fine qualities as a fighter for Human Rights and a convinced democrat.
“Now his noble work has been rudely interrupted. He is once again behind bars. He, a seriously ill man, is threatened not only with physical revenge. In a slanderous press campaign they are trying to smear his good name.
“It is impossible to allow this. On behalf of the Vladimir political prisoners I ask you to speak out quickly and effectively in defence of Alexander Ginzburg, using all resources at your disposal to obtain his release. Your actions should not be the result of an up-to-date evaluation of the general political and diplomatic situation as it is unfolding today. It is also impossible to act or not act depending on how great the real effectiveness of your speaking out may seem to you now. The question is one of a human act, and only considerations of morality can play a role in this.
“The action of the Soviet punitive agencies in relation to Alexander Ginzburg is distinguished by special brazenness and cynicism, for it was carried out precisely at the moment when indignation was rising throughout the world at at the actions of the governments of the USSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland and East Germany in relation to dissenters.
“This is a challenge to which it is impossible not to respond. This is a challenge not only to us, but also to you.
“Alexander Ginzburg must be released.”
*.
Vasily Barladeanu, Anna Golumbievskaya, Yury Gorodentsev, Elena Danielyan, Leonid Tymchuk, Leonid and Valentina Sery, Victor Borovsky, Sergei Shevchenko and Genrikh Altunyan: “Freedom for Alexander Ginzburg!” (4 February 1977)
“… We call on the leaders of the countries which participated in the Helsinki Agreement to recognize clearly that revenge on Alexander Ginzburg, a member of the Group to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreement, will mean the establishment in our country of a political and public climate which will lead to serious international consequences …”
*
E. Andronova, A. Barabanov, N. Yurysheva, V. Pochechuyev, Vyacheslav Bakhmin, V. Baranov, G. Baranova and Starostina: “To the Soviet Authorities”
“On 10 February a champion of human rights in the USSR, the leader of ‘the Group to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements’, Dr Yury Orlov, was arrested in Moscow.
“There is, probably, not an educated man in the country who has not heard this name and not sympathized (secretly or openly) with his noble, selfless activities. And if it were not for the inertia of fear which controls us, thousands of signatures would now be being collected in his defence!
“How readily we put on to the shoulders of others our duty and our civic responsibilities, this cross which many do not have the strength to bear, and not because of their weakness but because of completely banal reasons: someone has a dissertation to defend, another’s turn in the queue for a fiat has come, one person is too old for justice, another is too young. Yes, many are the excuses with which we try to lull our conscience to sleep!
“But we all know perfectly well where the truth is and where are lies. In our epoch this is clear even to schoolchildren. And though there are only few of us now who have forced ourselves to speak the truth (to shout it out or to whisper it), the process of awakening human conscience is irreversible, and there will be more of these voices from year to year, despite all the repressions and bans.
“Whatever charge is brought against Yury Orlov, we know he is innocent. And it is precisely for this reason that we are now raising our voices in defence of a man who is carrying the burden of truth for us …”
*
Vasily Barladeanu, Anna Golumbievskaya, Yury Gorodentsev, Leonid Tymchuk, Leonid and Valentina Sery, Victor Borovsky and Sergei Shevchenko: “Appeal to World Opinion” (1 March 1977)
“On 5 February [1977] an outstanding Ukrainian philosopher and economist, the writer Nikolai Rudenko, was arrested in Kiev … This arrest is strange…
“Nikolai Rudenko linked his fate with the Communist Party from the age of 19. He is the son of a miner. He took part in the defence of Leningrad. He was an officer and a political instructor. Even after a serious wound, as an invalid of group 2, Nikolai Rudenko returned to the front.
“After demobilization, in 1945, he was elected Deputy Secretary and then Secretary of the Party organization of the Union of Writers of the Ukraine. He was a member of the plenums of the Party committee of the Stalin district in Kiev and of the Kiev City Party committee.
“From 1939 Nikolai Rudenko contributed actively to the Komsomol and Party press. In his post-war collections of poetry he praised the heroism of Soviet people who had defended their country from the fascist enslavers. In his novels Rudenko glorified the Soviet working class and the collective farm peasantry .,.
“But once he became Leader of the Ukrainian Group to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements on 9 November 1976, on 11 November bricks went flying through the windows of his flat…
“The arrest of Rudenko is an open challenge to world public opinion.”
*
Pyotr Grigorenko: To the Leaders of the European Communist Parties. To all Communists in Europe”
“A communist my entire life — I believe that real communism is inseparable from democracy. Therefore I call on you to demand from the leaders of the Soviet Union that they stop the political terror which is being conducted in the interests of strengthening their personal power, and to the detriment of the cause of communism. Dear comrades! Demand from Soviet leaders that:
“1. They stop reprisals against the movement in defence of human rights.
“2. They release Alexander Ginzburg and Mykola Rudenko immediately.
“3. They declare a general amnesty for political prisoners in the USSR.
These are the minimal demands of democracy, which even Franco’s Spain has surpassed in less than a year …”
*
Gleb Yakunin, Varsonofy Khaibulin, Victor Kapitanchuk: “In Defence of Ginzburg”
The authors call on believers to help achieve the release of Ginzburg by prayers and deeds.
*
Pentecostalists: “In Defence of Ginzburg”
“… Because of the constant persecution and terrorizing of Pentecostalists in the USSR we are not putting our signatures, but we all unanimously raise our voice in defence of Alexander Ginzburg …”
*
Mart Niklus: “To the USSR Procurator-General”
The author asks for measures to be taken to avert judicial revenge on Alexander Ginzburg and Yury Olov.
*
Oles Berdnik: “To writers of the Ukraine and the Whole World”
The author tells of the tragic fate of Mykola Rudenko and the persecution to which he has been subjected. He appeals to writers with the question: “Whose side are you on, Writers of the world?”
*
Collective letter: “To Citizens of Countries which Participated in the Conference in Helsinki” (more than 100 signatures)
The letter describes the ‘anti-dissident’ campaign which has been launched in the country.
“Whatever charges may be fabricated against A. Ginzburg, Yu, Orlov, M. Rudenko and O. Tikhy, they have been arrested and are in danger of cruel punishment because they tried to implement the humanitarian obligations proclaimed at Helsinki in their country, the Soviet Union. In their activities these dissidents relied on the principle proclaimed at Helsinki: the problem of human rights is an international problem, inseparable from detente.
“Do the peoples and leaders of the countries of Europe, the United States of America and Canada agree to acknowledge as permissible the ignoring of humanitarian obligations by the Soviet Union and yet to regard as effective the remaining articles of the Final Act? Does such a ‘détente’ suit them, such a ‘warming’ of the climate in the largest country to participate in the Helsinki Agreement?”
*
Collective letter: “In Defence of Yury Orlov” (46 signatures)
The authors protest against the arrest of Yu. Orlov and demand his immediate release. “The activities of Yury Orlov … had a legal and constructive character… Orlov’s group made specific facts about violations of the humanitarian articles of the Final Act internationally known.”
***
OTHER LETTERS AND STATEMENTS
A. Lerner, Anatoly Shcharansky, Vladimir Slepak, Ida Nudel, Dina Beilina, Boris Chernobylsky, M. Kremen: “A Statement for the Press” (5 March 1977)
“Yesterday searches were carried out at the homes of a series of Jewish activists, and at the same time a letter by S. Lipavsky and a commentary on it, which contained crude slanderous fabrications against us, were published in the newspaper Izvestiya.
“In this way the charge of espionage and treachery was once again dragged into the light, creating a real threat of new anti-Jewish trials, similar to the notorious affair of the doctor-poisoners in 1952 [note 1].
“In this connection we declare:
“1. All our activities in the last few years has been directed exclusively to obtaining for ourselves and all who aspire to it the possibility to emigrate from the USSR to Israel.
“2. We strictly limit our activities within the bounds of Soviet laws.
“3. We inform world opinion about the state of affairs on emigration openly and publicly.
“4. We have never concealed our approval of those initiatives of the West which, in our opinion, were directed at the implementation of the obligations of the USSR on the question of free emigration.
“5. We are deeply convinced that in this we, like the Group to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements in the USSR, are acting not only in the interests of people wishing to emigrate, but also in the genuine interests of the Soviet people and in the interests of a real improvement in relations between East and West,
“In anticipation of possible anti-Jewish trials we state that all our evidence on the question of our participation in the struggle to leave will be confined to what has been set out above, and that we refuse in advance to participate actively in any staging of Show Trials, like those mounted by Stalin in the 1930s.”
*
Nadiya Svetlichna: “To the Ukrainian Helsinki Group, to the Central Committee of the Communist Party” (10 December 1976) Translation from Ukrainian
“… If I did not feel with my own flesh these prisoner transportations, the endless body searches, the slop-buckets, and the general degradation of human dignity, would I ever have rid myself of the ballast of illusions?
“Would I really have believed that at the end of the 20th century, in a civilized society which proclaims communist ideals, Stefaniya Shabatura would be given a painstakingly drafted document on the destruction of about 200 of her works ‘by means of burning’… ? The document was signed by Sergeyev, inspector of the operations section at penal institution ZhKh-385/3, whilst the camp commandant, Major Shorin, gave his blessing to the inquisitorial fire.
“Would I have not taken for slander the fact that the poet Stus, before being sent off for a complicated stomach operation, had a bugging apparatus sewn into the flap of his pea-jacket, and then about 800 verses and translations were seized from him … ? Captain Shalin, head of the operations section of ZhKh-385/3, directed this detective vaudeville, again not without the participation of Major Shorin.
“… And Mykhaylo Soroka, who served about thirty years there, never saw his grandson, and died in captivity [note 2 ///37]. His wife Yekaterina Zaritska, who was serving a 25-year sentence, was not allowed to say farewell, even to her dead husband …
“Finally, physical death is often only the beginning of a murder. In 1970 Alla Horska [Gorskaya] was killed, then her letters were seized, and finally even the name of the artist was eradicated from her works …
“I am now at liberty, ‘at liberty like a dog on a leash’, and possibly even worse…
“As a free person, as a mother of my child, I declare with all responsibility today, Human Rights Day, that I consider it below human dignity, after everything I have experienced, to be a citizen of the largest, most powerful and most perfected concentration camp in the world.”
*
Nadiya Svetlichna: “To the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union” (12 January 1977) Translation from Ukrainian
“Having lost my final illusions regarding elementary rights in the Soviet Union, I reject my citizenship for the reasons mentioned in the statement attached … [see above, Chronicle].
“I ask you to inform me to whom I should hand my passport: to Lieutenant Kravchenko, who gave it to me and who organizes the post-camp punitive actions against me and my seven-year-old son, or to the person directing him behind the scenes? …”
*
Kuzma Matviyuk: “To the Chairman of the Alexandria district soviet executive committee, Kirovograd Region” (17 December 1976) Translation from Ukrainian
“Since August of this year, and in the town of Alexandria itself since October, I have been searching for a job without results. Wherever I have turned, I have received refusals, though in a number of places I was hired, but dismissed the next day when they found out about my conviction…
“When receiving job refusals, every time I … get the advice: better turn to the KGB …
“Perhaps I would have turned to the KGB, if it were written openly that the KGB is the highest agency of authority, in charge of everything, including questions of work-organization …
“If it proves impossible to find a job in my profession, I ask you to provide me with material help as being unemployed …”
*
Kuzma Matviyuk: “To the editorial board of the newspaper Pravda” (5 January 1977)
“… Since August I have been looking for a job…
“In Pravda on 3 January 1977 … there was a report about two teachers … who remained without work because in West Germany there is a ban on dissenters working in certain professions …
“… in the following number I read an interview with an unemployed New Yorker…
“I would like to believe that Pravda will not be indifferent to my fate either — an unemployed person from Alexandria, and I ask the editorial board to put in a paragraph about my case, too …”
At the end of January 1977 Matviyuk got (see “After Release” in this issue, CCE 44.18).
*
Vladimir Albrekht, Irina Valitova, Vladimir Voinovich, Father Sergy (Zheludkov), Vladimir Kornilov, A, Korchak, Yury Orlov, Mykola Rudenko and Valentin Turchin: “Appeal by the Soviet Group of Amnesty international in Connection with Events in Eastern Europe” (17 January 1977)
(Another 25 people associated themselves with the appeal)
“In Czechoslovakia the authors of Charter 77 are being arrested. In Poland members of the Committee for the Defence of Workers are in danger of judicial revenge. In Yugoslavia Mihajlo Mihajlov, imprisoned for his articles, is dying in prison.
The authors of this appeal call on “all who hold dear the ideals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to demonstrate their solidarity with fighters for human rights” in these countries. They call on “members of Amnesty International throughout the world to unite their efforts with the aim of influencing the governments of Czechoslovakia, Poland and Yugoslavia, so that they observe human rights”. The also call on “governments and public opinion in countries which participated in the Helsinki conference to adopt a firm position on this question”.
The appeal concludes with a call to demand the immediate release of Mihajlo Mihajlov.
*
Council of Baptist Prisoners’ Relatives: “Statement to Kosygin, Podgorny, Brezhnev, the Committee for Human Rights in the USSR, Amnesty International, the UN General Assembly, the Helsinki Group and the Council of Baptist Churches in the USSR” (27 January 1977, 11 signatures)
The authors show that not one of their requests contained in the New Year appeal of 1976 to the authorities (CCE 41) has been fulfilled, and again list their requests.
*
S.M. Ponomaryov: “Open Letter to A. Petrov (Agatov)” (3 February 1977)
In connection with the “Liars and Pharisees” letter to the editorial board of Literaturnaya gazeta, former political prisoner S.M. Ponomaryov [note 3] writes in an ‘Open Letter’:
“In the Literaturnaya gazeta of 2 February 1977 Petrov revealed his true face, and now it is clear to everyone that he has long been an informer, with a record of service …
“As a recent resident of the Archipelago, through my personal acquaintance with many dissidents, and also with A.I. Ginzburg and his family, I want to reply to the letter of Petrov (Agatov) with a letter of my own …
“Let me state openly that Petrov (Agatov), in co-authorship with an unknown K.S., is brazenly trying to libel honest and selfless people who recently shared their prison rations with him. And he knows this perfectly well.
[In Alexander Petrov’s article one of the footnotes in a later edition of Izvestiya is signed ‘A.P.’ (i.e., Alexander Petrov), but ‘K.S.’ in another earlier edition of that day’s paper, Chronicle.]
*
Kronid Lyubarsky: “Alexander Alexandrovich is Inspired by Rice Porridge” (5 February 1977, 7 pp)
In connection with the same article “Liars and Pharisees” (see above) Kronid Lyubarsky, having recounted his meetings with A.A. Petrov in the Mordovian camps, writes:
“His letter is, probably, not a letter but a public denunciation of A.I. Ginzburg and Yu.F. Orlov…. Therefore, taking into account that the punitive agencies may utilize this denunciation, I consider myself obliged to testify to what the newly-appeared KGB informer (it is not important whether he is on the staff or a volunteer) stands for and what is the value of his confessions …
“Not long before our parting in the camp at Lesnoi village Alexander Alexandrovich was summoned by Colonel Drotenko, commandant of the camp’s KGB administration. After reproaching him for continuing to write anti-Soviet verses, he directed Petrov’s attention to the apparent signs of a rise in the material well-being of Soviet political prisoners: in the camp of Lisnoi for two months now they had sometimes been getting rice porridge for dinner… That’s what you should write about, Alexander Alexandrovich!”, Drotenko exclaimed with pathos.
“At that time Alexander Alexandrovich was not inspired by the Colonel’s challenge… Now, after coming down to earth from the heavens, he has seen the poetic value of rice porridge.”
*
Zinaida and Pyotr Grigorenko: “To Soviet and World Public Opinion”
“We, who in the heat of youth’s passions, ignored Stalin’s butchery and then experienced a terrifying awakening in the period of the 20th and 22nd Party Congresses [1956 and 1961], cannot help being put on guard by certain alarming phenomena in our contemporary public life.
“We have in mind, first and foremost, the issuing of special literature, films and television productions, in which, using the detective methods of the worst Stalinist times, the authors conduct antisemitic propaganda (under the flag of a struggle against Zionism), and kindle suspiciousness, fear of enemies, spy-mania, and mistrust of foreigners and things foreign. A campaign in the newspapers has unfolded in the same vein.
“The latest items of this type to appear are the ‘Open Letter’ of S.A. Lipavsky, printed in Izvestiya on 5 March [1977], and the afterword to this letter written by D. Morev and K. Yarilov.
“Both these ‘documents’ merit the date on which they were published [the 24th anniversary of Stalin’s death]. Only a very undeveloped and easily seduced person could believe in the ‘spy passions’ described. Moreover, anyone who can think is immediately struck by the fact that everything set out here is not only not proven, but cannot be proven. All those who might have been witnesses are already beyond the boundaries of the USSR, and all the ‘spy props’ described are so antediluvian and so stupidly used that only spiritual corpses of the Stalin epoch could have invented them.
“If you read carefully, then everything described serves only one goal: with the help of Lipavsky’s ‘personal reminiscences’, his references to absent witnesses and falsified ‘material’ proofs, it serves to cast a shadow on the movement in defence of rights, and, in particular, on ‘the Group to Assist the Implementation of the Helsinki Agreements’, especially two of its members who are at liberty: A. Shcharansky and V. Slepak.
“Against the background of this campaign our alarm for the recently arrested A. Ginzburg, Yu. Orlov, M. Rudenko and O. Tikhy is growing.
“Some former political prisoners are reporting that in the last few years KGB officials have often displayed during investigations a certain ‘Resolution on Methods of Coercion’. True, it is noted that these methods are to be applied only ‘when convincing materials are available on the suspect’s criminal activities, and the latter Is not without danger for the State system, and the suspect refuses to give evidence’.
“But who defines ‘convincing materials’ of criminal activities, and decides that it is ‘not without danger for the State system’? And is not the revival of Stalinism in the press and other propaganda a signal for the revival of Stalinist methods in investigations also?
“People be vigilant!
“We will not allow the darkness of terror to hang over the country once again, nor a revived Stalinism to begin again to rule over our lives and our futures!”
***
Valery Abramkin: “Statement to the Procurator of Moscow” (28 February 1977)
In connection with the threats of the KGB officials who chatted with him in April 1976 (CCE 43, “Extra-judicial Persecution”). Abramkin asks:
“Does the right to dismiss USSR citizens from work and to put limitations on the choice of this or that place of work really fall within the competence of KGB agencies?”
Abramkin’s complaint to the Procurator of Tuapse against the actions of the KGB (CCE 42, “Arrests. Searches, Interrogations”) was forwarded to the KGB. Abramkin asks: “Do you regard the actions of your colleagues as completely normal?”
In a reply from the KGB (CCE 43) it was said that books “withdrawn from circulation”, and books and songs “of a politically harmful and slanderous content” would not be returned to him.
“Does this mean that a law exists about the withdrawal of books published in our country? If so, then how can one read it? In what way can USSR citizens find out which books it is illegal to keep? Perhaps there exists an officially published list of books ‘withdrawn from circulation’? … Can KGB officials really… take away everything that seems to them to be ‘politically harmful’?”
Returning a part of his things to Abramkin (CCE 43), officer Roshchin told him that the other confiscated items had been “attached to the Decree”. Abramkin asks: “What does this expression mean: ‘Your things have been attached to the Decree’ — and is such an attachment legal?”
In connection with the 25 December 1972 Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Supreme Soviet about issuing giving ‘warnings’ about anti-social activities (CCEs 30, 32), which carries the stamp ‘not for publication’, Abramkin writes:
“Is the fulfilment of laws and decrees which are ‘not for publication’ obligatory for Soviet citizens? Is the very existence of unpublished statutes legal? Does a man who has read such a decree have the right to publicize its content? Who, and on the basis of what procedural norms, can define the actions of citizens of our country as antisocial?”
*
After dismissal from a research institute (CCE 43.14) engineer Abramkin became a worker in a geophysical exploratory group.
==================================
NOTES
[1] A reference to the 1952 Doctors Plot in which Jewish surgeons (“murderers in white coats”) were accused of plotting to murder Stalin. This followed the anti-Semitic campaign by the Soviet authorities in the latter 1940s against ‘rootless cosmopolitans’.
[2] See Soroka (1911-1971) obituary notice, CCE 20.13.
[3] Former political prisoner S.M. Ponomaryov, see CCE 13, CCE 15 & CCE 32.
====================
A Chronicle of Current Events 