The case of Sergei Pirogov (CCE 30.7 [2]) was heard in Arkhangelsk (Northwest Russia) in May 1974.
More precise information about Pirogov and certain circumstances of the pre-trial investigation have become known.
*
VADIM SOKOLOV
Vadim Nikolayevich SOKOLOV (mistakenly named Vladimir in CCE 30.7) committed suicide on 16 February 1973. After Lanskaya, an investigator of the Arkhangelsk Procuracy, examined his body and personal effects, certain of the deceased’s belongings (a jacket and a notebook) turned up on a rubbish-dump.
The notebook was picked up by V. K. Kostochka, a driver from the special vehicle-servicing section of the city cleansing department. In the notebook he discovered a letter written by Sokolov to his son just before his death and a request to transmit the notebook to the boy.
In April 1973, Kostochka handed the notebook to Pirogov, who undertook to find Sokolov’s son. Pirogov struck up a correspondence with the sister of the deceased: this correspondence became known to the Arkhangelsk Procuracy.
During searches conducted by Lanskaya in the course of her investigation into Sokolov’s suicide, the following were confiscated from Pirogov. In addition to the effects and literature mentioned before (CCE 30.7) these items were:
- Sokolov’s notebook;
- several issues of the Chronicle of Current Events;
- Social Issues [1];
- the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights;
- publications of the Committee for Human Rights;
- poems by Anna Akhmatova and songs by Galich.
Pirogov was arrested on 11 July 1973.
On 12 July criminal proceedings were instituted against him under Article 190-1 (RSFSR Criminal Code). During a search at the flat of Pirogov’s mother on 3 July, she was told, however, that her son had been arrested for taking part in a murder.
On 14 July it was decided that the measure of restraint would be detention in custody. On 21 July charges were brought against him.
*
Sergei Kuzmich PIROGOV was born in 1931 and has a higher education in economics.
He has two daughters, aged five and seven. Before his arrest he worked as an engineer of a construction office.
Earlier, on 12 February 1958, the Arkhangelsk Regional Court sentenced Pirogov under Articles 58-10 and 58-11 of the previous RSFSR Criminal Code to eight years’ imprisonment. He was freed after a pardon on 7 July 1965 (not 1964, as reported in CCE 30.7) .
*
INVESTIGATION
The investigation was conducted by local KGB investigators G. G. Romashenko, N. N. Belyayev (CCE 30.7) and B. I. Korotorev.
More than one hundred and twenty people were questioned: in Russia (Arkhangelsk, Moscow, Leningrad, Novosibirsk), in Ashkhabad (Turkmenia) [2], in Omsk, in Ukraine and Lithuania (Kiev, Vilnius, Kaunas); and elsewhere.
At the interrogations several witnesses were told that the case might be reclassified under Article 70 (RSFSR Criminal Code). They were also told of the existence of some ‘organization’ led by Pirogov: it was suggested to the witnesses that they should admit that they had participated in it.
*
From 11 November 1973 onwards, Pirogov was subjected to a forensic-psychiatric examination in the Serbsky Institute in Moscow. In January 1974 a commission made up of the Institute director Georgy V. Morozov, M. F. Taltse (D.Sc., Med.) and S. M. Gerasimova (Cand.Sc. Med.) ruled that Pirogov was accountable for his actions.
In the winter of 1974 the mother of the accused, N. G. Pirogova, twice sent statements to Soviet ‘president’ N. V. Podgorny. Amongst other things, she complained about the methods being used during the investigation: the pressure exerted on witnesses, and the lies to which the investigators were resorting.
N. G. Pirogova stated, for example, that after being summoned to the KGB one witness, V. Skvortsov, who had once been a guest in her son’s home, had not been allowed to go on a sea voyage abroad. He had been forced to resign his job ‘voluntarily’; his wife gave birth prematurely after twice being summoned to interrogations.
Efforts were being made to force witnesses “to admit the existence of an organization which the KGB knew did not exist”, recourse being made to the demagogic formula “an organization without an organization” …
The Arkhangelsk Regional Procuracy, to which N. G. Pirogova’s statements were redirected, notified her of the ‘groundlessness’ of her complaints.
*
On 24 March 1974 Pirogov himself sent a letter to Soviet ‘president’ N. V. Podgorny. He wrote:
“… in the name of humanity towards dissent and its manifestations, save me. Grant me a pardon, from a verdict which, through the mechanical working of the machine, could find me guilty of what I cannot be guilty of, because of my character and beliefs …
“If my way of life and my honourable actions are ruled to be harmful to those around me, it would be more honourable, humanitarian and just to deprive me of my [Soviet] citizenship and allow me quietly to leave the country …
“Any punishment involving imprisonment or exile would be a senseless repression of the natural and logical manifestations of dissent. A long time ago they developed in me into honest and progressive convictions in the spirit of Yugoslavian Marxism, the official ideology of Yugoslav communists (of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia).”
On 15 April 1974, the measure of restraint was changed to a signed undertaking not to abscond.
This was done because, in accordance with Article 97 (RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure), the maximum period of custody as a measure of restraint during an investigation is nine months. In practice investigatory agencies always receive permission from the Supreme Soviet Praesidium, whenever they want, to extend the period of custody.
*
INDICTMENT
On 17 April Yu. Lebedev, Senior Investigator of the Arkhangelsk Region Procuracy and a Junior Counsellor of Justice, signed the indictment and sent it to the court. Pirogov was charged under Article 190-1 (RSFSR Criminal Code) with ‘circulating’ Sokolov’s notebook and the Chronicle of Current Events.
The bill of indictment read:
“… Pirogov in person and through his acquaintance Gofman, who has left the USSR, received from Telnikov (who has also left the USSR [CCE 22.8 [20]) 13 copies of various issues of the Chronicle of Current Events. These were produced by Yakir and Krasin, who were convicted in September 1973 …
“By verdict of the Moscow City Court which became law on 1 September 1973 the Chronicle of Current Events has been ruled to be literature containing deliberately false fabrications which defame the Soviet political and social system. The slanderous orientation of the Chronicle of Current Events is confirmed by the record (dated 22 November 1973) of an examination of the relevant issues. Specifically, the issues [of the Chronicle] present matters concerning the domestic policy of the Soviet State in a slanderous way. They give distorted information about the arrests and criminal trials of people who have committed particularly dangerous State and other crimes. They describe in a slanderous vein the conditions in which prisoners are held in places of imprisonment, and the mentally sick in psychiatric hospitals. They also propagandize anti-Soviet literature and other material of a libellous character, received from abroad and illegally produced in the USSR.
“The notebook which formerly belonged to Citizen Sokolov contains libellous fabrications about the absence in the USSR of the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, the absence of a democratic electoral system, and so on …”
*
When he signed Article 201 (RSFSR Criminal-Procedural Code), i.e., at the end of the pre-trial investigation, Pirogov submitted a series of petitions.
He asked that materials confiscated from him but not mentioned in the charges, e.g., the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which more than one copy had been seized, be returned. All his petitions were rejected.
On 10 May 1974 Pirogov wrote a letter to Leonid Brezhnev. Among other things, he said:
“… The law gives the Head of State the right to amnesty a citizen before his case has been examined in court. Such a magnanimous gesture would be an act of good will towards the natural and logical manifestations of my dissent.
“At least it would be better to deprive me of my citizenship than to try me for ‘deliberate lies’, of which I cannot be found guilty by the nature of my beliefs and my character. Life in the USSR has become impossible for me for moral and ethical reasons …”
A reply to this letter arrived only after Pirogov’s trial.
In a letter dated 24 May 1974, addressed to the head of the remand prison, Yashkin, Arkhangelsk Regional Court chairman, wrote:
“Inform the convicted prisoner Pirogov that departure from the USSR is devoid of any practical meaning: he has been convicted by law to serve a sentence and must by law serve the term of imprisonment.”
*
TRIAL
From 15 to 22 May 1974 the judicial collegium of the Arkhangelsk Regional Court (Judge I.I. Semyonov as chairman, and People’s Assessors I. N. Borisov and L. F. Kuleshov) examined Pirogov’s case.
Procurator V. M. Bogdanov presented the prosecution’s case.
Attorney O. V. Lesko acted as counsel for the defence.
Pirogov’s petition, submitted earlier, for non-Party members to be appointed as people’s assessors for the hearing of his case, was granted. The trial was genuinely open.
*
Pirogov repudiated the charges brought against him as false and not proven, and pleaded not guilty.
He expressed a firm belief in the accuracy of the information contained in the Chronicle of Current Events and in the value of this publication as a provider of publicity [glasnost]. At the same time, he noted the possibility, as in any other publication, of unintentional ‘factual mistakes’ appearing in the Chronicle: this circumstance, he pointed out, did not provide adequate grounds for ruling that the information contained in the Chronicle was libellous. Pirogov expressed the hypothesis that he was being tried
“not for the literature confiscated from me, but as a recidivist: that is easier.
“I can see this at first hand. Kostochka is not being tried for passing on the notebook. Lanskaya is not being tried …”
*
WITNESSES
Witnesses V. P. Risling, A. A. Tsizman and L. A. Krechkova, were called to corroborate that Pirogov had ‘circulated’ the Chronicle. They had never acquired a Chronicle from Pirogov, nor seen him hand it to other persons.
A. A. Tsizman, a sister of V. A. Gofman, who had emigrated to West Germany (the Federal Republic), had heard from Gofman’s wife that Gofman sometimes brought literature from Moscow at Pirogov’s request. She had seen these ‘papers’ at Gofman’s house, and thought they were ‘bad’ as she had been questioned about them, during the investigation and now in court.
V. P. Risling, Tsizman’s husband, testified that at one time Gofman used to bring him samizdat materials, saying he had acquired them from Pirogov. Gofman told him that Pirogov obtained the material from members of “Sakharov’s Committee” [3].
L. A. Krechkova denied that she was familiar with the Chronicle: as regards her fingerprints being found on the reverse side of one sheet of a copy of the Chronicle confiscated from Pirogov, Krechkova supposed that she might have touched this sheet by chance if the Chronicle was lying amongst Pirogov’s books, which she sometimes borrowed.
*
Of the five witnesses called to corroborate the fact that Pirogov had ‘circulated’ Sokolov’s notebook, two (Yu.M. Kublanovsky and L.I. Myshakin) denied that Pirogov had given it to them to read.
Three — V. V. Patsyukov, S, A. Furman and A. A. Bachurina — confirmed that they had read it. Patsyukov and Furman testified that they had become interested on their own initiative in the ‘psychology of suicide’ and had asked Pirogov if they could read it. Bachurina testified that Pirogov had passed it to her through Myshakin so that she could say whether the notes in it really were made by Sokolov (Bachurina had worked with Sokolov and knew his handwriting).
At the trial, amongst other documents, a summary record of Criminal Case 63 (Yakir & Krasin) was read out. It contained, among other things, an expression of their bitter repentance, a promise to influence their accomplices and to cooperate directly with the KGB in the future. (The last assertion is not at all customary in a legal document. It is possible that it was wrongly interpreted: it could be a matter, for example, of promising to assist the investigators in the future as well, Chronicle.)
Before the final speeches, Pirogov, supported by his lawyer, addressed a written request to the court to return to him that part of the literature confiscated from him which was not mentioned in the indictment and of which there was more than one copy in the case materials.
*
“Taking into consideration the personality of the accused” and “the public danger posed by the crime he had committed”, the prosecutor asked for Pirogov to be given three years of imprisonment in a strict-regime camp. Worthy of note was the prosecutor’s assertion that the “subjective aspect, i.e. the aim with which Pirogov acquainted others with Sokolov’s notebook, has no significance in law”.
Defence counsel stated, among other things, that
“… Insufficient material has been assembled to charge Pirogov under Article 190-1 (RSFSR Criminal Code) … I consider that the charges have not been proven during the judicial investigation and that the accused Pirogov should be acquitted”.
During an exchange the prosecutor said:
“I object to the opinion of defence counsel that only a direct intention constitutes a crime under Article 190-1. Indirect intention, such as the creation of possibilities for literature to circulate, also constitutes a crime.”
In reply defence counsel referred to the official commentary to Article 190-1 in the 4th volume of the Criminal Law textbook.
Pirogov concluded his final speech with the words:
“I ask to be acquitted of the charges in the name of justice. I am different from the majority, but I have not committed any crime.”
*
SENTENCE
In the verdict the court repeated everything in the indictment.
It took into consideration, on the one hand, that “Pirogov was convicted in the past of a particularly dangerous State crime”, and, on the other, that “Pirogov has two minors to support, has a positive reference from work and is a conscientious worker”. As a result, the court sentenced Pirogov to two years’ imprisonment in a strict-regime camp.
*
The court ordered Pirogov to pay costs to the sum of 270 roubles, 95 kopecks.
In addition, the court passed a resolution on Pirogov’s request that some of the literature confiscated from him be returned: “The court has found no grounds to grant this request, as the documents confiscated from Pirogov are of significance to the case. Petition refused.” This decision was not announced during the trial, and a copy of it was not presented to the accused.
In accordance with the verdict, after it was read out, Pirogov was taken into custody in the courtroom.
*
On 24 May 1974 Pirogov sent a letter to L. N. Smirnov, President of the Association of Soviet Jurists [correction CCE 34.23], asking him to acquaint the Association with his case “for the purpose of examining the sufficiency of the evidence and procedural aspects of the sentence”.
On 29 May 1974 Pirogov sent an appeal to the RSFSR Supreme Court. A supplement to this appeal ends with the words:
“If the assumption that I am innocent is not disproved by the facts (of which I am sure), then I ask you to pass a resolution revoking the verdict of guilty: on the grounds of a failure to prove a charge as regards the Chronicles, and of the lack of a corpus delicti as regards the notebook.”
========================================
NOTES
- Obshchestvennye problemy (Social Issues) was a samizdat journal edited in Moscow by Valery N. Chalidze. Fifteen numbers appeared between 1969 and 1972, see Contents [16.1] Social Issues, etc.
The contents of each number were, with a few exceptions, summarized in the Chronicle (CCEs 10-27). Many reports and statements of the Committee for Human Rights in the USSR were published in later numbers of Social Issues.
↩︎ - Today referred to as Ashgabat, capital of Turkmenistan (pop. 253,000; 1970).
↩︎ - The Committee for Human Rights in the USSR (1970-1974).
↩︎
=========================
A Chronicle of Current Events 