This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If it was the RSFSR penal code, then what legal grounds were there for arrests in other R's, from the Baltics to Uzbekistan? -- Humus sapiens| Talk 01:25, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
In Soviet Union there was ONE penal code and article 58 is article of SOVIET penal code, not RSFSR penal code. Francesco
Article 58 was split when the law was revised in the early 1960s (see Anti-Soviet agitation). §58-10 became §70 of the new RSFSR Criminal Code. This §70 defined a maximum of 7 years of imprisonment followed by at most five years of internal exile. The version from the Ukrainian Criminal Code is available online; the RSFSR version was identical (I haven't found it online, but it is reprinted (in translation) in Loeber, D.A.: Urheberrecht in der Sowjetunion: Einführung und Quellen, 2nd ed.; Alfred Metzner Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1981. No ISBN. In German). Also in the 1960s, a new article 190(1) on the "dissemination of known falsehoods that defame the Soviet political and social system" was introduced in the RSFSR Criminal Code; it specified a maximum punishment of imprisonment for up to three years, or penal labour of up to one year, or a fine of up to 100 rubles. (Source: Loeber; Ukrainian version also mentioned at the extlk given above.) Lupo 14:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Also see Nikiforov, B. S.: Fundamental Principles of Soviet Criminal Law, in The Modern Law Review 23(1), pp. 31-42; January 1960. [1] states that the RSFSR §70 and the UkrSSR §62 were implementations of an identical §7 of the Union-wide "Fundamentals of Criminal Law" of 1958. Lupo 08:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
How is the Espionage Act of 1917 compared to the Article 58 (RSFSR Penal Code) probably nobody knows? Unlike espionage act that was challenged in courts, the Article 58 was never questioned and used purely and mostly for political purpose rather than national security. Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 13:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Somebody has entered: "58-14 were "saboteurs")[citation needed]."
Um, that is a citation, seems to me.
David Lloyd-Jones (
talk) 11:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
This article has a really obscure title that does not explain what the article is trying to be encyclopedic about and restricts to being little more than documentation of a particular law. The title makes it almost impossible to understand what is really being written about. If it was some other name, like "Counter-revolutionary laws of the Soviet Union", or "Enemy of the workers (Soviet penal code)" one would be much clearer what the article is about and much easier to include other similar law from other Soviet jurisdictions. - Cameron Dewe ( talk) 09:03, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
I see that some sections lack citations. Would links to The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn suffice? 2600:6C48:7A7F:70B4:692B:19DC:1E24:3F0C ( talk) 18:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If it was the RSFSR penal code, then what legal grounds were there for arrests in other R's, from the Baltics to Uzbekistan? -- Humus sapiens| Talk 01:25, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
In Soviet Union there was ONE penal code and article 58 is article of SOVIET penal code, not RSFSR penal code. Francesco
Article 58 was split when the law was revised in the early 1960s (see Anti-Soviet agitation). §58-10 became §70 of the new RSFSR Criminal Code. This §70 defined a maximum of 7 years of imprisonment followed by at most five years of internal exile. The version from the Ukrainian Criminal Code is available online; the RSFSR version was identical (I haven't found it online, but it is reprinted (in translation) in Loeber, D.A.: Urheberrecht in der Sowjetunion: Einführung und Quellen, 2nd ed.; Alfred Metzner Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1981. No ISBN. In German). Also in the 1960s, a new article 190(1) on the "dissemination of known falsehoods that defame the Soviet political and social system" was introduced in the RSFSR Criminal Code; it specified a maximum punishment of imprisonment for up to three years, or penal labour of up to one year, or a fine of up to 100 rubles. (Source: Loeber; Ukrainian version also mentioned at the extlk given above.) Lupo 14:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Also see Nikiforov, B. S.: Fundamental Principles of Soviet Criminal Law, in The Modern Law Review 23(1), pp. 31-42; January 1960. [1] states that the RSFSR §70 and the UkrSSR §62 were implementations of an identical §7 of the Union-wide "Fundamentals of Criminal Law" of 1958. Lupo 08:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
How is the Espionage Act of 1917 compared to the Article 58 (RSFSR Penal Code) probably nobody knows? Unlike espionage act that was challenged in courts, the Article 58 was never questioned and used purely and mostly for political purpose rather than national security. Aleksandr Grigoryev ( talk) 13:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Somebody has entered: "58-14 were "saboteurs")[citation needed]."
Um, that is a citation, seems to me.
David Lloyd-Jones (
talk) 11:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
This article has a really obscure title that does not explain what the article is trying to be encyclopedic about and restricts to being little more than documentation of a particular law. The title makes it almost impossible to understand what is really being written about. If it was some other name, like "Counter-revolutionary laws of the Soviet Union", or "Enemy of the workers (Soviet penal code)" one would be much clearer what the article is about and much easier to include other similar law from other Soviet jurisdictions. - Cameron Dewe ( talk) 09:03, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
I see that some sections lack citations. Would links to The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn suffice? 2600:6C48:7A7F:70B4:692B:19DC:1E24:3F0C ( talk) 18:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)