CREATING OR PARTICIPATING IN AN ANTI-SOVIET ORGANIZATION

“CREATING OR PARTICIPATING IN AN ANTI-SOVIET ORGANIZATION” – in the Criminal Code of the Ukrainian SSR, which entered into force on January 1, 1961, this was defined as “organizational activity aimed at committing particularly dangerous state crimes, as well as participation in an anti-Soviet organization.” In Soviet legislation, this was one of the elements of a crime that was sometimes charged against arrested members of real or imaginary underground organizations, circles, or groups. In the 1922 Criminal Code of the RSFSR, this offense is described in Articles 60–63; in the 1926 Criminal Code of the RSFSR—in paragraphs 4–6 of Article 58 (“counter-revolutionary crimes,” which corresponds to Article 54, paragraphs 4–6, of the 1927 Criminal Code of the UkrSSR and its July 20, 1934 revision); in a later revision, it was consolidated into a single Article 58-11 (Article 54¹¹ of the Criminal Code of the UkrSSR); in the USSR Law of December 25, 1958, “On Criminal Liability for State Crimes,” it was Article 9; and in the 1960 Criminal Code of the RSFSR, it was Article 72 (Article 64 of the 1961 Criminal Code of the UkrSSR). None of these articles carried their own independent penalties; the accused were punished under the sanctions provided for by other “political” articles.

In investigative and judicial practice, the concept of an “anti-Soviet organization” was interpreted quite broadly. For example, in the post-Stalin period, charges of creating or participating in an anti-Soviet organization were brought not only against leaders and members of underground political groups but also against activists of some religious associations, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists, and others; the very fact of belonging to a particular community was considered participation in an “anti-Soviet organization.” At the same time, membership in independent dissident associations that operated openly (e.g., the Helsinki Groups) was almost never qualified under Article 64, although the activities of these associations were declared by the courts to be “anti-Soviet.” This was likely due to the authorities’ reluctance to recognize such associations as a legal reality, even one of a “criminal” nature.