The Rudenko-Tykhy Trial (3) (12/31/77)

The Rudenko-Tykhy Trial

(3)

(The trial of Mykola Danylovych Rudenko, born in 1920, and Oleksiy Ivanovych Tykhy, was the first court proceeding against members of the Helsinki monitoring movements in the Soviet Union. The trial was held in the small town of Druzhkivka, near Donetske, from June 23, 1977, to July 1, 1977. The court was presided over by Edvard Mykolayevych Zinchenko, deputy chairman of the Donetske Oblast Court of Criminal Cases. The people's assessors were Perush, Lukashenko and Bezverkhnyi, alternate. The secretary was Nadia Hryhorivna Susidko. The prosecutor was Arzhanov from Kiev, Rudenko's counsel was Fedir Ivanovych Aleksyevnin, and Tykhy's counsel was Koretsky. The proceedings of the case comprise 4 volumes. The following account of the trial was translated by the Committee for the Defense of Soviet Political Prisoners in New York City.)

ABBREVIATED. Prosecutor Arzhanov spoke 2 hours and 20 minutes.

What we have here is not some everyday matter, but an especially dangerous crime against the state and anti-Soviet activity by Tykhy and Rudenko. Both actively engage in anti-Soviet activities. Both are adversaries of socialism, helpmates and agents of enemy states. These renegades and traitors to the Fatherland prepared, reproduced, retained in their possession and circulated slanderous documents which defamed the Soviet state and social system for the purpose of undermining and weakening Soviet rule.

In 1960 Rudenko circulated and sent to the Central Committee (of the Communist Party) his "Essay on Questions of Political Economy". In 1963, under the pseudonym of "Fedorov", he sent an anti-Soviet work entitled "The Universal Law of Progress" to the Central Committee. In 1972 he sent an open anti-Soviet letter to one of the secretaries of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine (CCCPU), and a second letter to the Department of Science of the CCCPU. In 1974 he circulated among Sakharov and Turchyn the anti-Soviet works "Energy of Progress" and "Economic Monologues". He wrote and retained in his possession the following anti-Soviet: "The Glow Above the Heart", "Farewell to My Party Card", "Where Are We", "Reply to a Former Friend", "Before the Commissioning of the Kaniv HES (Hyrdo Electric Station)". Rudenko wrote and disseminated the anti-Soviet poems "History of an Illness" and "The Cross". In 1975 he wrote an anti-Soviet letter to Sakharov and the anti-Soviet story "The First Line" and the novel "The Eagle's Gully" - in 1976; "Gnosis and Contemporaneity", "Afterword" to the "Energy of Progress", an anti-Soviet letter to Turchyn (1974), and letter to Sakharov (1976); (he circulated) Grigorenko's "Introduction" to his own "Economic Monologues"; he wrote and circulated "If You Refuse To Be a Swine - Off To Jail with You!", "To All People of Good Will", a letter addressed to the Prosecutor of Moscow and Kiev; (he circulated) the letters of Berdnyk (1972-1977), the letter of Borys Kohvar (dated January 30, 1972), V. Moroz's "Chronicle of Resistance", Dzyuba's "Internationalism or Russification", the letters of Barladyanu, Y. Terelya, Nadia Svitlychna and many others. He prepared, retained in his possession and disseminated (the following) anti-Soviet documents: the Declaration, Memorandums Nos. 1, 2, and 3. Many of the above-mentioned documents reached the West and were published there. Articles about them appeared in Western enemy newspapers.

Wishing to become more active against the Soviet regime, Rudenko befriended the mentally-ill Grigorenko and in his apartment, as well as in the apartment of Ginzburg, passed documents to foreign correspondents. He reproduced and circulated in Moscow (among) (he reads off a list of names) the slanderous pasquil "If You Refuse To Be a Swine-Off To Jail with You!". He gave Ginzburg documents to be passed on to foreign correspondents. Rudenko accepted the letter of the mentally-ill Yosyp Terelya as factual and used it for his own ends. Together with Grigorenko, he prepared a letter appeal to Communists in the United States and Canada. He authorized Grigorenko to sign his (Rudenko's) name to this "Message of Goodwill" (Poslannia) ... He conducted an anti-Soviet telephone conversation with Bohdan Yasen, and this conversation was published in the newspaper "Svoboda". He wrote a letter to Bohdan Yasen, in which he asked the latter to help him establish contacts with the (American) consulate in Kiev, since dissidents in Moscow have free access to correspondents, while those in Kiev have no such possibilities.

The prosecutor charged Oleksiy Tykhy with authoring the following articles: "The Ukrainian Word", "Thoughts About the Native Language", "Village Problems", "Reflections on the Ukrainian Language and Culture in the Donetske Region", the Declaration, and Memorandums Nos. 1, 2, and 3, as well as with possession of firearms.

The prosecutor said: "Tykhy's destructive activity was well masked and well thought out. Tykhy persistently tried to implement it. Tykhy claims that the presence of Russian schools and higher educational institutions is a violation of Ukraine's sovereignty." The prosecutor accused Tykhy of forcible Ukrainization of citizens who speak other languages, because Tykhy wrote that people who do not speak Ukrainian should not be permitted to hold leading positions (in the Ukrainian republic), and in this fashion sowed enmity between the Ukrainian and Russian peoples.

The prosecutor said a great deal more and at the end demanded: that Mykola Danylovych Rudenko (be sentenced) to 7 years' strict regime labor camps and 5 years' deprivation of freedom in accordance with Art. 62, Sect. I of the Criminal Code of the UkSSR, and that Oleksiy Tykhy (be sentenced) to 10 years' special regime labor camps and 5 years' deprivation of freedom in accordance with Art. 62, Sect. II of the Criminal Code of the UkSSR and Art. 222, Sect. II of the Criminal Code of the UkSSR, and that Tykhy be declared an especially dangerous recidivist in accordance with Art. 26, Sect. II of the Criminal Code of the UkSSR.

The Defense of M. Rudenko

Rudenko's attorney, Fedir Ivanovych Aleksyevnin asked Rudenko whether he had any objection to his defending him in Russian. Rudenko did not protest.

NOTE: The trial was conducted in terribly broken Ukrainian. Earlier the judge asked Rudenko and his wife whether they wished to dismiss Aleksyevnin as Rudenko's counsel. The Rudenkos replied that as it was too late to hire another lawyer - it was the sixth day of the trial - they agreed that Aleksyevnin represent Rudenko at this level.

Attorney Aleksyevnin:

I cannot deny and dispute the guilt of my client Rudenko, since it has been proven by the evidence in the case. But I ask the court to review the reasons why the crime was committed, where its roots lie, are they strong, and are there grounds for believing that under the influence of Soviet reality Rudenko will change his views regarding the Soviet state and social order. It cannot be said that what he has done so far is the culmination of his life. I believe that time passes and everything changes, and the roots of his crime will wither away with time. These roots are not of a purely political nature. Before Stalin's activities during the personality cult became known, that is until 1956, not only was Rudenko's life wholly devoted to supporting Soviet rule, but he did much to strengthen it.

When one of Rudenko's collections of poetry was censured by our criticism, his works were no longer published. Then he was expelled from the Party and from the Union of Writers. These circumstances influenced Rudenko. He felt wronged. This led to a sense of dissatisfaction and injustice. No one wanted to hear his side. This resulted in an angered emotional state and Rudenko began looking for reasons, recalling the cult of personality, gathering documents of people who had been sentenced, contemplating the fate of Ukrainians, and so forth. His sense of being wronged transformed itself into (a need) to express his views in his works.

Meetings with Sakharov, Grigorenko, as well as with like-minded people, who were present here as witnesses, also affected him. And although they are not worthy of Rudenko, my client met with them, finding satisfaction in discussion. All this helped to ease Rudenko's pain. In addition, his material situation had become less secure. The whole essence of these experiences was expressed in the documents confiscated during the searches of his residence. I regard them as unobjective, for they are not based on confirmed facts. Rudenko was mistaken not only in regard to our reality. He says that he seriously accepted Article 19 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. Article 19 does indeed deal with human rights. However, these rights cannot be used against our state and people!

Yet this does not mean that Rudenko's goal was the overthrow of Soviet rule. He had to deal with bureaucrats whom he considers potentially dangerous. But these are not those essential roots that can lead us to conclude that Rudenko is an especially dangerous person.

In choosing the term of punishment for Rudenko, I ask the court to take into consideration the explanation of certain views, which Rudenko says, have been misunderstood. For example, in the last verses of the poem "The Cross" he had something else in mind, and not the overthrow of Soviet rule. Please take into consideration also that part of his works were not circulated. For example, his "Credo of Unity" was read by only one person - the writer O. Berdnyk. Rudenko sent his "Essay on Questions of Political Economy" only to the Central Committee, his "Economic Monologues" only to Sakharov. The brochure "Ukrainian Intellectuals Tried by the KGB" came into his possession accidentally and he did not show it to anyone. "To People of Goodwill"...The letter from Barladyanu was not circulated. Neither was the letter to the Shah of Iran. As regards the anonymous materials which he found in his mailbox, he himself describes them as garbage. Rudenko himself is critical of some of the documents. He says: "I draw a line between the results of bureaucratic distortions and Soviet rule as a whole". This statement by Rudenko proves that he is not conservative and that he is able to return to the true path which he followed for many years and along which he did a great deal of good for his people and his state.

From 1935 Rudenko was a member of the Komsomol; prior to the war, in 1941, he was already a member of the Communist Party. During the harsh years for our nation, he did not finish his education, but, concealing the fact that he was blind in one eye (the left) from the military commission, he went to defend the Fatherland from the Hitlerite invaders. He was a soldier in a cavalry regiment of the Special Force formed by the Peoples' War Commissariat. Afterwards he finished school and was a political instructor on the Leningrad front. In October 1941, he was seriously wounded, but despite this continued to propagate the policies of our party among the troops. In May 1946 he was deputy chief of the Political Section on the Caucasus front; on March 15, 1946 he was promoted to the rank of major on the 3rd Western and Byelorussian fronts. In 1944 he was awarded the Order of the Red Star and later other medals. All this is corroborated by documents in the case. The case also contains exceptionally good personal characteristics of M.D. Rudenko. (The lawyer then read excerpts from various character testimonials).

1. Rudenko feels very sick, but continues to work...

2. Rudenko is conducting excellent propaganda work, he is dedicated to the party of Lenin...

3. (The following is a recommendation from the Presidium of the Writers' Union). Rudenko is highly disciplined, morally stable, has often been elected to the posts of assistant secretary of the Party organization and secretary of the Party organization of the Writers' Union. His novels "Wind in the Face" and "The Last Sword" won popularity among a wide readership. M.D. Rudenko is active in all the activities of the Union of Writers of Ukraine.

Prior to his expulsion from the Party and the Writers' Union, Mykola Rudenko accomplished a great deal. He published over 30 books and did much toward the education of our youth.

I believe that prosecutor Arzhanov has asked too harsh a sentence for Rudenko, and I feel that I am justified in asking for its reduction. I am certain that Rudenko has the spiritual and intellectual potential to find the path he followed earlier. Please take into consideration that Rudenko is an invalid of the Second World War. The blood he shed on the altar of the Fatherland also contributed to our victory. Rudenko is gravely ill and such a long term of imprisonment can seriously worsen his condition. I ask the court to show humanity and pass the minimum sentence on Rudenko.

(To be continued)

| Home Page |