![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
This essay uses the numerous statistics produced by revolutionary tribunals to explore the nature of counter-revolution after the October Revolution, how it changed and developed across the Civil War, and the importance of revolutionary justice, as represented by tribunals, in facilitating the Bolsheviks’ victory. Statistics are unreliable sources and the state faced many problems in gathering data, but these figures permit us to explore key areas and trends, and demonstrate the ability of revolutionary justice to react in more nuanced ways to the counter-revolutionary threat than repressive organs such as the Cheka.
Notes
1 Only legal scholars are interested in this period as seeing the foundation of Soviet law, but they say little about the role of law in facilitating Bolshevik victory (Hazard Citation1960; Solomon Citation1996).
2 For exceptions, see Rendle (Citation2011, Citation2013), Retish (Citation2013). There are also institutional histories in Russian: Titov (Citation1983, Citation1987, Citation1988), Gor’ev (Citation2011), Makutchev (Citation2012).
3 Lenin (Citation1960–1970, vol. XXVII, p. 33 (22 February 1918), p. 219 (30 March 1918), p. 322 (4 May 1918); vol. XXXIII, p. 358 (17 May 1922); vol. XXXVI, pp. 576–77 (31 March 1922); vol. XLV, p. 348 (20 October 1921), p. 369 (4 November 1921)); Lenin (Citation1971–1975, vol. XLIV, p. 396 (20 February 1922)).
4 Gosudarstvennyi arkhiv Rossiiskoi Federatsii (hereafter GARF), f. A-353, op. 1, d. 1, ll. 14–5 (correspondence to local departments and soviets, 21 and 26 June 1918).
5 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 23, l. 21 (26–28 April 1920).
6 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 58, l. 59ob (report, January 1921).
7 I have not discussed the statistics used subsequently by Russian historians (Titov Citation1983, Citation1987, Citation1988; Gor’ev Citation2011; Makutchev Citation2012). Their precise numbers differ, especially if drawn from provincial archives, but none appear to challenge the trends discussed here.
8 The following discussion examines all cases investigated by tribunals, not those eventually brought to trial.
9 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 2, d. 13, ll. 3–3ob (correspondence to cassation department, 8 November 1918).
10 Proletarskoe revolyutsiya i pravo, 5–6, 1–15 October 1918, 78; Kurskii (Citation1918, p. 73); Izvestiya, 16 July 1918, p. 6, cites 1,708 cases in Moscow for only 21 December 1917 to 1 June 1918.
11 The report on military tribunals for 1921 admitted excluding about 10% of returns from tribunals as they were illegally completed or delayed, but claimed this only involved 1.5% of cases.
12 Only 25 civilian tribunals and Moscow are included, but as the figure for people’s courts is also likely to be an underestimate, the percentages are probably broadly accurate.
13 Grazhdanskaya voina v Prikam’e (Perm’, 2008, p. 429) (report from local Cheka, December 1919).
14 Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi voennyi arkhiv (hereafter RGVA), f. 33988, op. 3a, d. 16, l. 4ob (report on military tribunals in 1920, n.d.).
15 GARF, f. A-353, op. 3, d. 40, l. 134 (report on railway tribunals prior to 1 July 1920, n.d.).
16 Trudy tsentral’nyi statisticheskogo upravleniya, . Tom VIII. Vypusk 6. Statisticheskii ezhegodnik 1922 i 1923. Vypusk vtoroi (Moscow, 1925, p. 67).
17 GARF, f. A-353, op. 5, d. 18, l. 217 (report, 20 January 1922); Rabochaya Moskva, 26 February 1922, p. 4.
18 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 1, d. 52, l. 60ob (report, 12 August 1921).
19 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 58, l. 60 (report, 7 February 1921).
20 GARF, f. A-353, op. 9, d. 45, ll. 90–90ob (report, 23 July 1918).
21 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 2, d. 10, l. 1ob (report to cassation department, n.d.).
22 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 3, d. 45, l. 150 (report, 20 June 1921).
23 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, l. 206 (list of crimes for the second half of 1920, n.d.). Orel established a special department for desertion; f. R-1005, op. 3, d. 35, l. 18 (report, 15 April 1920).
24 RSFSR. Narodnyi Komissariat Yustitsii. Otchet IX Vserossiiskomu s”ezdu sovetov (Moscow, 1921, p. 52); GARF, f. A-353, op. 5, d. 72b, l. 79a (report, n.d.).
25 Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi arkhiv sotsial’no-politicheskoi istorii (hereafter RGASPI), f. 17, op. 109, d. 201, ll. 235ob–248 (report, n.d.).
26 GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 38, l. 16ob (first half of 1922); d. 39, l. 16ob (second half of 1922).
27 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 1, d. 57, ll. 83, 85 (figures produced by RVTR).
28 ‘Svodnyi otchet’, Ezhenedel’nik sovetskoi yustitsii, 51–52, 31 December 1923, 1185.
29 Comparable figures are in GARF, f. A-353, op. 5, d. 72b, l. 79a (report on tribunals, 1920–1921, n.d.).
30 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, l. 179 (report on military tribunals, n.d.); op. 3, d. 40, l. 131 (report on railway tribunals up to 1 July 1920, n.d.); RGVA, f. 33988, op. 2, d. 454, l. 7 (report on military tribunals, mid-1922); GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 38, l. 6; d. 39, l. 5 (reports on transport tribunals in 1922, n.d.).
31 GARF, f. A-353, op. 5, d. 72b, l. 185 (report on legal institutions, 1921–1922, n.d.). These figures were comparable with military tribunals (90% in the first half of 1922), although fractionally higher than transport tribunals (81%); RGVA, f. 33988, op. 2, d. 454, l. 14 (report on military tribunals in first half of 1922, n.d.); GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 38, ll. 18ob–19; d. 39, l. 3 (reports on transport tribunals in 1922, n.d.).
32 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 2, d. 20, l. 37 (Narkomyust to the Cassation Tribunal, 13 September 1920); d. 2, ll. 580–80ob, 583 (circular to military tribunals, n.d.).
33 The death penalty was officially abolished on 17 January 1920 for civilian tribunals after defeats of various White forces; Dekrety sovetskoi vlasti. Tom VII (Moscow, 1975, pp. 104–5). It was reinstated for areas under martial law on 4 November 1920, which, given the prevalence of such areas, meant most tribunals as reflected in the statistics for 1921.
34 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, l. 179 (statistics for military tribunals in 1920); f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 38, l. 4ob; d. 39, l. 3ob (reports on transport tribunals in 1922, which includes statistics on second half of 1921, n.d.). RGVA, f. 33988, op. 2, d. 454, l. 14 (report on military tribunals in first half of 1922, n.d.).
35 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 2, d. 20, l. 37 (Narkomyust to the Cassation Tribunal, 13 September 1920).
36 GARF, f. A-353, op. 3, d. 140, ll. 4–6 (report on military tribunal between 17 and 29 December 1919).
37 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, ll. 46ob–47 (statistics for military tribunals in 1920). The head of all military tribunals made a similar observation (Danishevskii Citation1920, p. 42).
38 GARF, f. A-353, op. 3, d. 83, l. 93 (statistics); op. 5, d. 18 (report on Cherepovets provincial department of justice in 1921, n.d.).
39 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, l. 179 (statistics for military tribunals in 1920).
40 GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 38, l. 5ob; d. 39, l. 3ob (reports on transport tribunals in 1922, n.d.).
41 GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 84, l. 9ob (report on Perm’ railway tribunal in October 1920, n.d.).
42 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, l. 179 (statistics for military tribunals in 1920); RGVA, f. 33988, op. 2, d. 454, l. 14 (report on military tribunals in first half of 1922, n.d.).
43 GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 38, l. 5ob; d. 39, l. 3ob (reports on transport tribunals in 1922, n.d.).
44 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 3, d. 67, ll. 35ob–36 (instructions on local trials in the Don region, 3 October 1921).
45 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, l. 207 (statistics for military tribunals in 1920). For comparisons, see GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 38, ll. 20ob–21; d. 39, ll. 19, 21 (reports on transport tribunals in 1922, n.d.).
46 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 112, l. 88 (report, n.d.). The backgrounds of the other four were not given.
47 RGASPI, f. 17, op. 109, d. 201, ll. 235ob–48 (report, n.d.).
48 GARF, f. R-1005, op. 2, d. 104, ll. 562–64ob (trial protocol, 16 July 1921).
49 GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 95, l. 34 (annual report, 20 May 1921).
50 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 28, ll. 148–49 (report, 22 October 1921); 88% were literate and 5% party members.
51 GARF, f. R-3042, op. 1, d. 86, ll. 11ob, 14ob (successive reports, n.d.).
52 RGASPI, f. 17, op. 109, d. 245, ll. 1–2 (report on activities between 31 July and 3 September 1920, n.d.).
53 GARF, f. A-353, op. 4, d. 111, l. 206 (report, n.d.).