22.8 News in Brief

No 22 : 10 November 1971

[1]

On 27 January 1971 Ostap Pastukh, a teacher of Ukrainian language and literature, was arrested in the village of Petrichi in the Busk District of the Lvov Region.

The following is known of O. Pastukh: he is about 40, a graduate of the Philology Faculty of Lvov University; he is married (his wife is a teacher of Russian in the same village) with two children. In 1967 Pastukh was arrested on being denounced by the headmaster of the school in the village of Nakrashe, where he was working at the time. Pastukh’s arrest was due to certain remarks and attitudes which had struck the headmaster as nationalistic.

A case was fabricated against Pastukh under Article 166 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code (exceeding one’s authority or official powers). He was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment and banned from teaching for five years.

But the appeal court quashed the sentence.

On 28 January a search of Pastukh’s home was carried out, nothing being found or confiscated. He was indicted under Article 187-1 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code (equivalent to Article 190-1 of the Russian Code). At first the investigation was conducted by investigator Yaresko of the Lvov KGB. …

(Excerpt from the Ukrainian Herald (Ukrainsky visnyk)
[Ukrainian equivalent of the Chronicle], No. 5).

[2]

On 21 April 1971 Semyon Korolchuk (b. 1930), a resident of Lvov and a gynaecologist at the Institute for Maternity and Child Protection, was arrested in connection with the same case. The KGB first took an interest in Korolchuk in 1967, in connection with the case of the UNF (Ukrainian National Front [see CCE 17.7]). How the accused are conducting themselves is unknown. [36]

(Excerpt from the Ukrainian Herald, No. 5).

[3]

During the night of 29-30 April 1971 the yellow and blue flag (of the Ukrainian People’s Republic [of 1917-20]) appeared on a water-tower in the town of Novy Rozdol [Lvov Region]. The flag was removed only at mid-day on 30 April. Next day Pyotr Medved, aged 18, an apprentice fitter from the Rozdol Mining Combine, was arrested.

Medved is being held in the KGB prison in Lvov. He is being pressed to confess that it was he who hung up the flag. When visited by his mother Pyotr complained that he was being beaten.

(Ukrainian Herald, No. 5.)

[4]

The trial of the Hutsul [37] Nikolai Supenyuk.

On 27 July 1969 a trial was held in the district court in the village of Verkhovina (Ivano-Frankovsk Region). The indictment was under Article 187-3 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code (equivalent to Article 190-3 of the Russian Code).

The accused Nikolai Alekseyevich Supenyuk (b.  1899), resident of the village of Bystritsy, is an illiterate collective farmer. He was “accused of organising a mob of people in Bystritsy with the object of illegally opening a church on 2 February 1969”. (Supenyuk was a member of the Church Council.) The court sentenced Supenyuk to one year of ordinary-regime corrective-labour camps. He pleaded not guilty.

(Ukrainian Herald, No. 5.)

[5]

KIEV. On 28 May Anatoly Ivanovich Lupynis (b.  1937) was arrested. It was the second time he had been arrested.

He was first sentenced in 1956 by the Ukrainian Supreme Court to six years of strict-regime corrective-labour camps under Article 62 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code (Article 70 of the Russian Code). In Dubrovlag [in Mordovia] he received an additional sentence of four years (it is not known why). He was released in 1967. He returned home in an extremely grave condition, accompanied by a camp doctor. He was registered as a group 1 invalid (paralysis of the legs). Until his second arrest he worked as an administrator for the regional section of the Musical and Choral Society.

On 22 May Lupynis recited poetry at a meeting at the Shevchenko memorial in Kiev, held to mark the hundredth anniversary of the return of the poet’s remains from Petersburg to his homeland. A week later he was arrested. The indictment was again under Article 62 of the Ukrainian Criminal Code. During a search only works by Lupynis himself were confiscated. In October he was sent to the Serbsky Institute of Forensic Psychiatry (Moscow) for in-patient forensic-psychiatric examination. He was judged to be of unsound mind. The diagnosis was schizophrenia.

The investigation is being conducted by Berestovsky, senior investigator of the Republican KGB, and investigator Prokhorenko. Two witnesses have testified that Lupynis gave them works by [Academician] Sakharov to read. Photocopies of articles by Sakharov, taken from KGB archives, have been attached to the case. The trial is expected to take place at the beginning of December.

[6]

PRIENAI (Lithuania)

The arrest  of the priest Juozas Zdebskis (see CCE 21.9) on 26 August 1971 for preparing children for the First Communion provoked protests by the parents of the children and other believers. Two letters of protest were sent, one to the Central Committee of the Party, the Supreme Soviet and the Council of Ministers of the USSR (2,000 signatures, 19 September 1971), [38] the other to the Procurators-General of the USSR and Lithuania and to the Party Control Committee attached to the Central Committee (400 signatures).

The letters complain about the impossibility of obtaining religious literature and of preparing children for their First Communion, about the shortage of priests, and about other violations of the law regarding freedom of conscience. The children’s parents state that Zdebskis had instructed the children at their request. V. Chalidze has also acted in defence of J. Zdebskis (see the present issue, CCE 22.7).

On 26 September Catholics of another Lithuanian parish in Santaika (Alitus district) sent a letter signed by 1,190 people to L. I. Brezhnev. [39] It says, inter alia:

“All this distresses us and engenders mistrust of the line taken by the government. No sooner had the priest A. Seskevicius, convicted for carrying out his spiritual duties, been released from a camp than the vicar Juozas Zdebskis was arrested in Prienai for preparing children, brought by their parents, for their First Communion. If his action is considered to be a crime, then freedom of conscience and worship remains a mere dream. . . .

“We Catholics have no prayer-books, and are forced to use old and tattered copies. Three years ago the authorities, as if mocking us, issued a pitifully small number of prayer-books, – yet every Catholic is obliged to possess a good one. We do not even have the Holy Scriptures to read!

“We deeply regret that Catholics are subject to discrimination in the same way as negroes suffer at the hands of racists. …”

The trial of Juozas Zdebskis took place at the end of October. The sentence of the court was one year of corrective-labour camps (the details are as yet unknown). [40]

[7]

MOSCOW. On 21 September a search was carried out at the home of Sergei Grigorevich Myuge. [41] The reason for the search, judging by the nature of the interrogations which Myuge underwent on 4 and 5 October, was the testimony of R. Fin, who had been arrested previously (see present report, item 12).

During the search a large amount of samizdat literature was confiscated. On 4 October Myuge was required to give an undertaking not to leave the city, as he was suspected of possessing and circulating libellous literature. S. Myuge, a biologist, was disabled in the war; he was arrested in 1949 and legally exculpated in 1956. In the middle of October S. Myuge sent a letter to V.V. Gagarsky, senior investigator of the Moscow Regional Procuracy, protesting at the charges which were being brought against him.

[8]

ASHKHABAD [Turkmenia]. The Turkmenian poetess Annasoltan Kekilova (who has had three books published and whose songs have often been broadcast on the radio) twice wrote letters to the 24th Party Congress and the Central Committee of the Party, in which she criticised shortcomings in Turkmenia.

The repression she suffered in consequence of this (she was deprived of work and the publication of her books was stopped) led her to submit a renunciation of Soviet citizenship. On 26 August Kekilova was forcibly placed in a psychiatric hospital. In a letter to the CPSU Central Committee her mother, O. Seidova, states that her daughter is absolutely healthy and has never been registered with a psychiatrist.

Seidova also sent a statement [42] to the international section of the Central Committee of the Party (to a certain “Comrade Nikolayev”; a copy was sent to Andropov, Chairman of the KGB) setting out the circumstances of the case. At the end of the statement she says:

“On 26 August an ambulance, which no-one had called and no-one needed, came to our home. My daughter, who is in perfect health, had her arms twisted behind her back, her little boy was roughly pushed aside, and she was forcibly put into the vehicle and taken away to a psychiatric hospital.

I was told that she had been taken for examination. But this looks more like a reprisal. … In the hospital they can do anything they like with her. The doctors in that hospital have told her that she is in good health. And they said this: ‘If you don’t give us a signed statement that you wrote to the Central Committee because you were in a nervous condition, you’ll stay in hospital for ever.’ That is what they threatened her with. She refused to sign any such statement. I protest against this and demand her immediate release.”

[9]

BAKU [Azerbaidzhan]. Enver Mishu-Oglu Odabashev, chairman of the Meskhetian Chief Organising Committee for Liberation, who was arrested on 7 August 1971 (see CCE 21.8) in the Saatly District of Azerbaidzhan, was sentenced on 24 August 1971 by the people’s court of the Nasimin district in Baku to two years’ imprisonment under Article 162 of the Azerbaidzhani Criminal Code (unlawful seizure and use of collective-farm land). [43]

Odabashev (b.  1917), a teacher of history who graduated from the Kirghizian Pedagogical Institute in 1955, was disabled in the second world war and is incapable of physical labour. A three-man delegation of Meskhetian Turks has sent a letter to L. Brezhnev expressing “indignation at the attitude of the authorities to the interests of our nation”.

It is pointed out that since their eviction in 1944 from the area bordering on Turkey, the Meskhetian Turks have been scattered throughout Central Asia and the Caucasus; their families are separated and are unable to maintain family ties; there is no possibility of teaching-their children in their native language, or of preserving their national culture. The Meskhetians are being assimilated by the surrounding population. Realising this, they are trying to achieve a return to their native lands, and have created the Turkic Association for the Defence of the National Rights of the Turkic People (of which Odabashev was elected chairman in 1964). The Association regularly holds congresses (see CCE 21.8). [44]

In the middle of September M. Niyazov (Odabashev’s first deputy) was arrested. No detailed information has yet been received.

[10]

KIEV. On 29 September about a thousand people assembled at Baby Yar to honour the memory of the victims of the mass executions in 1941.[45]

Those present, who included some who had travelled from other cities (there were wreaths from Moscow, Leningrad, Sverdlovsk and Tbilisi bearing Hebrew inscriptions) and many young people, were surrounded by units Of police and special detachments, who shone searchlights at them and photographed them.

[11]

PAVLODAR. On 7 September Naum Shafer, senior lecturer at a pedagogical institute and Master of philological sciences, was arrested in Pavlodar in Kazakhstan. He was indicted under Article 170-1 of the Kazakh Criminal Code (Article 190-1 of the Russian Code).

The materials on which the charge against Shafer is based include A. I. Solzhenitsyn’s short story “An Easter Procession”, Yu. Daniel’s story “This is Moscow Speaking”, A. Galich’s song about the “White columns”, poetry by the Tselinograd [Kazakhstan] poet Prokurov (who was summoned as a witness in the case) and poetry by A. Akhmatova and Tvardovsky. Prior to his arrest Shafer had been subjected to various forms of persecution, in the course of which he was accused, among other things, of “Zionism”; as a result of this he was dismissed from his job, and the academic council recommended that he should be stripped of his academic title.

The investigation of his case, as later became clear, had already been completed by the time of his arrest, and on 7 October Shafer was brought before the Pavlodar Regional Court. The trial lasted two days.

The prosecutor was Regional Procurator Ivanov, the Judge was Ten, deputy chairman of the Regional Court, and defence counsel was Poryvai. The theoretically “open” trial was held, as is customary, in a room which was filled to overflowing by a specially invited “audience”. Shafer’s brother and wife were admitted to the court room only on the second day of the hearing, as witnesses for the prosecution.

The Prosecutor’s address abounded in threats and anti-Semitic attacks. The defendant refused to plead guilty and countered in a well-reasoned manner the charges of circulating samizdat.

The court sentenced Naum Shafer to one-and-a-half years’ imprisonment. An appeal hearing was fixed for 24 November in the Kazakh Supreme Court in Alma-Ata.

The court also delivered separate decisions concerning Shafer’s “accomplices”: Alexander Zhovtis and Izrail Smirin, senior lecturers at Kazakhstan State University; [46] Alexander Keningson, senior lecturer at the Alma-Ata Agricultural Institute; and Shtein, an acquaintance of Shafer, who was recently placed in a psychiatric hospital. They have all been dismissed from their jobs, as has Lazar Shafer, brother of the accused, lecturer at the Tselinograd Pedagogical College.

[12]

Moscow. The trial of R. Fin

The trial of R. T. Fin, a research officer at the Institute of Biophysics of the USSR Academy of Sciences (in Pushchino-na-Oke), who was arrested in the early spring of 1971 (see CCE 18.10, item 8), was held in the Moscow Regional Court on 13 October. Roman Fin (b.  1941), who was sent to work at Pushchino on graduating from Gorky University in 1966, has had seven papers published (most of them as co-author).

Fin was charged with circulating deliberately false fabrications libelling the Soviet political and social system (Article 190-1 of the Russian Criminal Code) and with the petty theft of state property (Article 96, para. 1 of the Code: he was stopped by a janitor while trying to take a mirror out of the Institute).

Fin was charged with the circulation of the following works: The Technology of Power and The Partocracy by [the emigre, A.] Avtorkhanov, The Foreign Correspondents in Moscow [47] and Will the Soviet Union Survive Until 1984? by A. Amalrik, Midday by N. Gorbanevskaya and “An Open Letter to A. D. Sakharov” by P. G. Grigorenko [not yet available outside the USSR].

When questioned during the pre-trial investigation R. Fin had not admitted any guilt, although not disputing the facts alleged in the indictment.

Witnesses Kiselev, Opanasenko and others testified in court that Fin had given them samizdat works to read. Defence counsel Rausov did not deny the charge or the conclusions of a [forensic-psychiatric] examination, and requested the court to prescribe compulsory treatment in a hospital of special type.

The court found the facts of the indictment proven and, judging Fin to be of unsound mind (diagnosis: mild chronic schizophrenia), sent him to a special psychiatric hospital for compulsory treatment.

Until his arrest Fin had never consulted a psychiatrist or been on a psychiatric register.

Fin’s wife has engaged another defence counsel to submit an appeal. The appeal contains a petition for Fin to be treated in a hospital of general type.

Myuge, who underwent a search and two interrogations in September and October of this year, is suspected of supplying R. Fin with samizdat works. Myuge’s case

was separated from Fin’s at the stage of the pre-trial investigation. Myuge was not summoned to Fin’s trial (see present report, item 7).

[13]

UZHGOROD [W. Ukraine]. This spring Vilmos Kovacs, a Hungarian poet and prose-writer, a member of the USSR Union of Writers and the only editor for Hungarian books at the Carpathians publishing house, [48] and Andros Bertedek (the nom-de-plume of A. Stumpf), a young Hungarian poet and a junior editor at the same establishment, were compelled to leave the publishing house, and to this day have been unable to find work. The editors of newspapers and journals in the area have been instructed not to print material submitted by Kovacs and Stumpf.

This repression was provoked by an article by Kovacs and Stumpf, “From the History of Trans-Carpathian Hungarian Literature”, which appeared in the monthly journal Tiszotai [On the Banks of the Tisza]. published in Szeged, Hungary), Nos. 10-12 for 1970.

In May 1971 Stumpf, who had previously been found unfit for military service (he suffers from rheumocarditis), was called up into the army, but by decision of a medical commission he was sent back from the regional assembly point for a second examination, which again confirmed that he was unfit for service (besides the rheumocarditis he has a liver complaint); the military commissariat, however, retained Stumpf’s passport.

A few years ago the studio “Forras” (“Source”), uniting young authors writing in Hungarian (mostly students at Uzhgorod University), was formed by the regional division of the Union of Writers. The person responsible for the work of the studio was Kovacs. In August 1971 a “purge” of the studio began. At the end of August an editorial entitled “The Youth of Trans-Carpathia, the ‘Forras’ Studio and Alienation” appeared in the regional Party newspaper (Carpathian Pravda), which is published in Hungarian. The editorial, in a sharply aggressive tone, accused the members of the studio of being apolitical. Their poetry, it said, was permeated with a spirit of alienation, and this “despite the fact that the motherland has given them a care-free childhood and the opportunity to study and live in a comfortable hostel catering for their every need” (this is probably a reference to the building in which students at Uzhgorod University live; rooms designed for three people are occupied by five, there is no hot water and the heating is poor).

“It is clearly no coincidence”, the editorial continues, “that a poem by the politically compromised Pasternak was published in the youth newspaper” (a translation into Hungarian published in the newspaper Trans-Carpathian Youth, which appears in Ukrainian and Hungarian).

The regional Party committee has formed a commission to investigate attitudes prevalent among students of the Hungarian section of the Philology Faculty of the university.

[14]

LENINGRAD. The protracted hunger-strike (more than 70 days) by Vladimir Borisov and Victor Fainberg, prisoners in the Leningrad Special Psychiatric Hospital, came to an end on 3 June (not 7 June, as reported in CCE 20.11, item 17).

After Borisov and Fainberg had seen defence counsel M. A. Linda [whom Borisov referred to as “an optimist” in an as yet unpublished letter], they were transferred to the eleventh (somatic) section. The hospital administration carried out all their demands except the most fundamental – a re-examination of the case in court with the participation of the accused (the head doctor explained that this was not within his power). All their other demands were met: termination of pharmacological treatment; permission to receive books, to send and receive letters and take exercise; the placing of both of them in the same cell; visits by relatives and a lawyer.

The physical conditions of both has improved and they have regained their normal weight: as a result of the hunger-strike each lost about twelve kilograms. At the beginning of September the administration noted that Borisov and Fainberg exhibited “a liking for conflict situations”. The grounds for this formulation were the following incidents: [49] an orderly, arriving for duty in an intoxicated condition, insulted one of the patients. Borisov demanded that the doctor on duty be called, and when he did not appear – the duty officer. No-one came in answer to the call. Borisov and Fainberg then wrote a report addressed to the head doctor. Next day the head doctor stated that the orderly had been sober, and told them “to mind their own business”. On another occasion an orderly was taunting a patient. Fainberg demanded that he should stop this humiliation. In reply the orderly said: “Why are you poking your nose in, you bloody Yid!” Unable to restrain himself, Fainberg struck the orderly across the face.

Condemning Fainberg’s action, the head doctor said: “Why did you have to hit him? The orderly is only eighteen, and he has had no higher education.” As far as is known, the orderly was not punished.

On 23 September a regular [i.e. six-monthly] meeting of the [visiting psychiatric] commission was held, under the chairmanship of Dr. Rabinovich of the Serbsky Institute. The commission decided to extend the term of Fainberg and Borisov’s confinement until the next meeting of the commission (January 1972), since they were “inclined to provoke conflicts and unable properly to adapt themselves to their surroundings”.

In October the administration’s treatment of them took a turn for the worse: they were prohibited from receiving parcels and, in violation of the promise given previously, were separated once more (Borisov was transferred to another section, since “his physical condition has improved”). [50]

[15]

The following have been released from the camps:

On 7 October, from women’s political camp ZhKh 385/3 – Ruta Alexandrovich (sentenced to one year by the Latvian Supreme Court – see CCE 20.2).

On 7 October, on completing her sentence – M. P. Semyonova (sentenced to ten years in the case of the “True Orthodox Church” [istinno pravoslavnaya tserkov]. On Semyonova see CCE 15.8 [item 10] “Inmates of the women’s political camp”.

On 7 October, from camp No. 3 – Victor Kupin, after serving ten years’ imprisonment for attempting to cross the frontier (Kupin served in the Soviet Army on the territory of the GDR).

On 8 October, from an ordinary-regime camp, – the physicist Rolan Kadiyev, after serving a three-year sentence. (Kadiyev is a member of the Crimean Tatar movement, see CCE 9.2).

On 12 October Vladimir Tkachyov was released after serving ten years for “betrayal of the fatherland”.

According to unconfirmed reports, the artist Yury Ivanov has been released early from the Mordovian camps (see CCE 10.9). He had recently been working in the hospital zone of camp No. 3. His present whereabouts are unknown.

Victor Shtilbans, one of the accused at the second Leningrad Jewish trial [see CCE 20.1]) has been released from the Leningrad KGB investigation prison on completing his term of imprisonment (one year). He has been granted a Leningrad residence permit.

At the beginning of September Victor Krasin returned to Moscow. The sentence under which he had been in exile since December 1969 (five years) was quashed after a protest by the Procurator.

In September 1971 Genrikh Altunyan was transferred from an ordinary-regime camp to a place of exile (see CCE 21.10 (item 21) for latest report on him). His address is: Krasnoyarsk Region, Uansky district, Khairuzovka settlement. He is at present working as manager of a garage.

On 23 October Natalya Gorbanevskaya was transferred from the Kazan Special Psychiatric Hospital to one of the general wards in Butyrka Prison (Moscow, K-55, institution IZ-48/2), where she is waiting to be placed in the Serbsky Institute.

[16]

RIGA. At the end of September Ilya Rips, who was released from the Riga psychiatric hospital in April 1971 (CCE 14.11, item 14), was refused permission to leave for Israel.

[17]

The whereabouts of A. E. Levitin-Krasnov were given incorrectly in CCE 21.10 (item 6). He is in an ordinary-regime camp in the town of Sychyovka in the Smolensk Region, institution YaO-100/7. He is working as a labourer. (For his trial, see CCE 20.7).

[18]

Vladimir Dremlyuga is serving his new three-year term in a strict-regime camp with the address: Yakutskaya ASSR, Yakutsk, B. Markha settlement, postbox  YaD 40/5.

[19]

In Moscow in the middle of October the investigation into the case of Nadezhda Yemelkina (see CCE 20.11, item 14) was concluded, and the materials were signed in accordance with Article 201 of the Russian Code of Criminal Procedure. The trial is expected to take place at the end of November.

[20]

On 3 November J. Vishnevskaya (see CCE  19.11, item 6) and V. Telnikov (see CCE 16.10, item 8) left the USSR for Israel.

[21]

The Chronicle is in possession of the following document:

The priest, the parish council, the choir-members, the working people, and all the members of the community of the Church of the Veil in Medvedok [Kirov Region], in accordance with their Christian conscience,

Consider it essential:

  1. Under no circumstances to permit false, slanderous or other malicious gossip about our social life or the civil authorities.
  2. To regard any violation of this obligation as a blow to the dignity of all members of the community.
  3. That the name of the violator, should the occasion arise, be made known to the whole community.

[22]

MOSCOW. On 17 October 1971 the historian Roy Alexandrovich Medvedev sent an Open Letter to the editors of Pravda and other newspapers complaining about a search of his home which had been illegally carried out oh 12 October 1971 by Captain Zaiko, an investigator from the district station of the Moscow police.

The search was carried out in connection with the case of A. A. Shakalskaya, with the object of “recovering books stolen by Shakalskaya from various Moscow libraries and given by her to Medvedev R. A.” Neither Zaiko nor the three men in plain clothes who directed the search found any of the “gifts”, but they confiscated a large quantity of printed publications and manuscripts belonging to Roy and his brother Zhores Medvedev, as well as scientific notes and records.

Next day Zaiko repeatedly telephoned R. Medvedev and asked him to come to the district police station, saying that “other people were waiting for him as well” and threatening him with “serious consequences”, adding: “You realize that it was not I who was in charge of the search”.

“I assume”, writes R. Medvedev, “that the KGB, just as on the recent occasion when nine unknown persons broke into Solzhenitsyn’s empty country cottage [see CCE 21], will deny all involvement in this confiscation. Who, then, were those three unknown men? Perhaps they were representatives of a new secret political police?”. The unlawful confiscation of the scientific notes was the subject of a complaint submitted by R. A. Medvedev on 14 October to the Moscow City Procurator (attached to the letter was a list of the confiscated materials). [52]

[23]

SYKTYVKAR [Komi Republic]. On 9 May 1971 R. I. Pimenov, who was sentenced in 1970 to five years’ exile (see CCE 16.2) [53] and is at present living in the town of Syktyvkar, sent a statement to the Chairman of the Komi Council of Ministers.

He pointed out that refusing him work in his speciality was both unlawful and completely irrational: Pimenov has been working at a saw-mill in the settlement of Krasny Zaton, first as a saw-operator and at present as an electrician. In November 1969 Pimenov defended his dissertation for the degree of Doctor of physico-mathematical sciences, which was unanimously approved by the Academic Council of the Mathematical Institute of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In May 1971, after Pimenov had been sentenced, the Higher Certifying Commission received a positive report on his dissertation, but after a letter from “a certain organisation”, as a representative of the HCC stated, all the materials were returned to the Academic Council.

“The damage caused to the national economy by the employment in this manner of a unique specialist,” writes Pimenov in his statement, “who has created a new direction in science on the border between mathematics and physics, and who speaks more than ten foreign languages, is obvious.”

[24]

On 13 September a Dutch group of “Amnesty International” wrote to R. I. Pimenov expressing its concern and sympathy for him, and inquiring about his health, his needs, and the conditions in which his family was living.

NOTES

[36. Korolchuk was later sentenced to 4 years of strict-regime camps, under Article 62 of the Ukrainian Code, for circulating samizdat, including works by V. Moroz, – according to information in Ukrainsky samostiynyk, Munich, 1971, No 10.]

[37. Supenyk came from the Hutsul region of the Carpathians, in S.W. Ukraine.]

[38. Zdebskis protests summarised in a New York Times dispatch dated 26 September.]

[39. Letter to Brezhnev from Lithuanian Catholics summarised in AP and Reuter dispatches of 22 October.]

[40. Agency dispatches of 26 November reported that 600 Catholics demonstrated outside Zdebskis’s trial, that he had been severely beaten after his arrest, and that Father P. Bubnis of Raseiniai had also received a one-year sentence.]

[41. Myuge is a biologist who specialises in phytopathology and has published numerous learned articles, e.g., in Doklady AN SSSR, 1957, t. 115, No. 6.]

[42. See details of this statement by Ogulsakhat Seidova (aged 72) in a New York Times dispatch of 27 September 1971.]

[43. On conviction of Odabashev see also a Reuter dispatch of 10 October.]

[44. On Meskhetians see also Chapter 13 in Reddaway, Uncensored Russia.]

[45. On Baby Yar see also a UPI dispatch of 29 September.]

[46. Zhovtis is a long-time member of the USSR Writers’ Union and a critic. He wrote the book Stikhi nuzhny, Alma-Ata; 1968. Smirin has written on Isaac Babel.]

[47. An abridged English version of Amalrik’s text about foreigin correspondents was published in the New York Review of Books, 25 March 1971, Russian text in A. Amalrik, Stati i pisma, Amsterdam, 1971, pp. 55-77.]

[48. See Kovacs’s biography and photo in Pismenniki radyanskoi Ukrainy, Kiev, 1966.]

[49. For other such “conflicts” with the staff, see Fainberg’s “Appeal to Organisations which Defend Human Rights” in Kaznimye sumasshestviem, Possev Verlag, Frankfurt, 1971, pp. 381-99.]

[50. The Times, 3 January 1972, reported that Borisov and Fainberg they had declared a new hunger-strike in protest, and also gave other details on the Leningrad prison-hospital.]

[52. See also agency dispatches of 17 October and the New York Times dispatch of 19 October. Roy Medvedev’s book about Stalinism, Let History Judge, was published in the UK in 1971, as were A Question of Madness, written by him and his brother Zhores, and The Medvedev Papers (author, Zhores Medvedev).

Vechernyaya Moskva (11 February 1972) reported that A. A. Shokalskaya (sic) had been sentenced to six years imprisonment.

[53, Interesting new materials relating to Pimenov’s case have appeared in Vestnik Russkogo studencheskogo Khristianskogo dvizheniya, 91 due Olivier de Serre, Paris, 1971, No. 100, pp. 188-203. These are a transcript of one of Pimenov’s interrogations and the record of the search of his home on 18 April 1970, with a full list of the 250 items of samizdat which were then confiscated from him.]