Fight against violations of “revolutionary legality” in local Soviets of the BSSR (1932-1936)
The introduction indicates that the object of research is personnel policy in the Byelorussian SSR. The subject of the research is the activity of the authorities and management to combat official crimes in the local Councils of the BSSR. The purpose of the study is to identify the purpose, objectives, means and results of the implementation of the state policy of countering official crimes in the rural Councils of the BSSR in 1932-1936. The scientific principles of historicism (consideration of the mechanism of combating official crimes in the context of general trends in the political development of Soviet society in the 1930s) and system (study of the process of countering official crimes as an integral element of soviet personnel policy), general scientific and specific historical methods (historical-genetic, historical-comparative, historical-system) were applied. In the main part, it is noted that constantly changing the higher party-soviet leadership of the USSR interpretation of the principle of “political expediency” in option 1932-1936 was required to curb the arbitrariness going on in the field by managers at different levels in relation to the peasantry, to make them not to go beyond, which was determined by the directives of the Moscow center. At that time, this tactic was applied mainly to employees of village Councils. Mass inspections of the state of revolutionary legality were held in all regions of the Republic. The revealed violations of “revolutionary legality” were expressed in illegal fines, seizure of property and its appropriation, arrests and beatings of individual and collective farmers by village Council leaders, embezzlement of money, valuables and other property. Several show trials were organized against senior village Council and district employees. In conclusion, it is noted that as a result of the measures taken, the level of official crimes in rural Councils has been significantly reduced, the arbitrariness of their chairmen is limited, and criminal penalties for illegal methods of solving tasks set by higher authorities have become a reality. Officially, these crimes were considered and punished as criminal, only in some cases they were given a political context, and therefore the fight against official crimes in 1932-1936 cannot be considered as a manifestation of political repression.