What percentage of people were acquitted in "Stalin's trials"

Upvote:9

What were "Stalin's trials"?

If you want to limit the discussion to the few "show trials", like Шахтинское дело or "Московские процессы" (1, 2, 3), you can compute that from the public information and get something like 1%. These were well scripted events and acquittals were limited to some foreigners (e.g., Germans at the Shakhty) and specific stunts ("see, this is a real trial, we even acquitted X" - to execute him after the next trial).

1927 - 1955, all political cases: 0%

"Convictions" vs "Acquittals" were meaningless in these cases.

This was not how the Soviet "judiciary" operated, especially during Stain's years. It was a system not of meting out punishments for crimes, but for fulfilling the government needs for free labor in GULAG (aka "industrial armies" prescribed by the Communist Manifesto).

A funny tidbit: the huge article Сталинские репрессии does not even mention the word "acquittal" ;-)

post-Stalin

Later on (after the 20th congress), the court proceedings became more meaningful (see, e.g., Дело мальчиков), but only in some criminal (non-political) cases.

E.g., consider Rokotov-Faibishenko: this was in 1960, and an entirely economic (not political!) case. However, the perpetrators were tried on a ex post facto law (expressly forbidden by all Soviet constitutions) 3(!) times and were sentenced to death.

Standard Operating Procedure

"Thinking"

The "Soviet thinking" during Stalin's years went like this:

  • Chekist: Anyone can be suspected
  • Prosecutor: A suspicion by Chekists is sufficient grounds for an arrest warrant
  • Judge: An arrest is a conclusive proof of guilt

While looking caricaturish, these principles were accepted by "everyone", coalescing into the adage "у нас зря не сажают" ("our system does not imprison people for nothing").

"Working"

Chekist

A CheKa/GPU/NKVD(&c) operative was a high status government official: well paid, fed, clothed; permitted to carry a gun. He was feared and respected. He valued his job.

His job performance was evaluated on how many people he brought to trial. To catch his quota of "enemies of the people", he used many informers who reported on their social and workplace acquaintances: some to get rid of rivals or arbitrary vindictiveness, others out of genuine love for the country/political idealism &c.

Given "агентурные материалы" (agents' material reports, e.g., "John Doe said that he was not paid fairly" or "Jane Doe thinks(!) that she is better than the party secretary"), he has no choice to ask for an arrest warrant and interrogate the suspect, asking for evidence on more people. If he did not, he would have been accused of "political myopia" and arrested himself.

Prosecutor & Judge (and "кивалы"/"nodders")

ты что, органам не доверяешь?!

This question (what, you do not trust the security apparatus?!) was very dangerous. If you do not backpedal right away, you will find yourself on the receiving end of the "justice" system.

Finally

This question reminds me of another one (Were there in the USSR monasteries decorated with Soviet orders?) - both betray complete ignorance of Soviet realities. This is not to belittle the questioners, of course, but to underscore how effective Soviet propaganda was.

More post

Search Posts

Related post