Moscow People's Front. In the Baltic Republics, the existence of mass opposition movements made It Impossible to stage mere show-case elections.
The elections are for 2,250 deputles to the Congress of People's Deputies, who are then to elect a 544 strong Supreme Soviet. This number is divided up
Into three slates. Fifteen hundred deputies are to be elected from territorial and national-territorial districts. The national-territorial districts are divided up equally among the 15 republics, regardless of population and thus maintain the principle of equal representation on which the old Soviet of Nationalities was based.
The other 750 delegates are to be elected by public bodles. Of these 425 are reserved for the Communist Party and associated organizations (100 for the CPSU, 75 for the Komsomol, 100 for the All-Union Central Trade-Union Council, 75 for the Committee of Sovlet Women and 75 for the All-Union Council of War and Labor Veterans).
The other 325 delegates from public organizations were allotted to "mandated public organizations," such as cooperative associations, the Soviet Academy of Sciences, the writers' unlon, Journalists' union and so on.
In all cases in which there were more than two candidates, candidacies had to be ratifled by assembles, half of whose members were selected by district election committees and the other half by the candidates themselves. This system made It easy for the Communist Party bosses to pack these assemblies, allowing few genulnely Independent candidates to get through. Most criticism In the USSR, reportedly, was focused on this stage. In Estonia, the rulers were forced simply to drop it and register all nominees.
THE JOURNAL of the Moscow People's Front, Moskovskii Vestnik, published the following statement on the March 26 elections to the Congress of People's Deputies in its February 1989 issue. It has been somewhat shortened. T HE HASTILY drawn up, undemocratic law on the election of people's deputies predetermined the outcome of the election campaign. In essence, this is an obvious game, in which the voters are consigned to the role of helpless mice in the claws of partynomenklatura cats. Nonetheless, taking part in such rigged games is useful and unavoidable. It offers political experience, attracts sympathy from voters and exposes the machinations of the authorities.
The procedure of candidates being put forward by social organizations confirmed the original undemocratic nature of the formation of this body of 750 participants in the future Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR. In essence, these deputies are not being elected by the people but by a narrow circle of leaders of the social organizations, who pay no attention to the opinions of the rank and file of these organizations and generally put forward party functionaries as candidates for the Congress of People's Deputies.
Nothing prevented the Presidium of the 28 Academy of Sciences of the USSR from confirming "its people" as candidates. No International Viewpoint #160 • April 3, 1989 protests from rank-and-file Communists prevented the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU from confirming its 100 candidates for 100 seats. This is the "leading and directing" role of the CPSU, to make a show of elections without real choice. Bureaucracy banned local voters' assemblies
The Soviet party bureaucracy did everything possible to keep the workers' collectives and the local voters' assemblies from presenting candidates genuinely chosen by the people. Not even the pressure of public opinion and the central press had any real effect on the policy of the rulers. A clear example of this is the banning of the local voters' assembly in the Liublin district [in Moscow]. The reason is clear. They had to give the green light to "their man" — the chair of the Moscow City Executive [Mosgornispolkom], V. T. Saikin.
The local pre-electoral assemblies became yet another heavy club or hamstring for thwarting democracy. Who were the bulk of delegates to these assemblies? They were from the workers' collectives, functionaries and tame workers; and from the inhabitants of the capital, retired Communists who were elected by the party organizations in the housing offices. In 26 territorial electoral districts, 81 people were registered [as candidates]. Of these, more than 50 were general directors and nomenklatura officials of various ranks.
Characteristically, this time the authorities were afraid even to rely on their customary allies, the representatives of the "workers' aristocracy." Therefore, of the 81 candidates, only nine are workers.
In the final list of candidates, there are very few progressive and radical-minded figures. Of the independent social organizations in the capital, the most active role was played by People's Front and the Fund for Social Initiatives, whose programmatic bases are close to those of the People's Front. The Fund was officially registered not long ago as a voluntary society. Neither the Democratic Union nor Pamyat directly sponsored candidates. The Moscow People's Front put forward four candidates and after the regional pre-electoral assembly managed to get S. Stankevich registered (for the Cheremushkin Region).
It should be noted that even a grouping as strong as the Bratievo Self-Management Committee, which got the support of almost 60,000 people in the district, was unable to maintain its candidate in the preelectoral regional assembly.
At the present time, the question remains, vote or call on the voters to boycott the election in those districts where there are no candidates worth voting for — as for example in the Volgograd, Krasnopresnensk, Kuibyshev, Leningrad, Liublin, Proletarsk and Sverdlov Soviet regions (this list should be refined). An active position is probably preferable — crossing out the names of all the candidates on the territorial region-ballot. At the same time, it is essential to vote for Yeltsin and against Brakov, the director of ZIL [the enterprise that makes the Soviet officials' limousines].
In the March 26 elections, it is useful to carry out agitational work, using street meetings, rallies, leafleting, collections of signatures, and meetings of candidates with voters. On the last day, March 25, it is essential to hold mass agitational actions in every electoral region. In a word, everyone to work, everyone out for the elections! *