Search

Background. The relevance of the study is determined by the need for a comprehensive objective analysis of the Politburo activities of the Central Committee of the CPSU (b) – the Central Committee of the CPSU on the investigation’s falsification of the case of the Minister of State Security (MGB) of the USSR V.S. Abakumov. The publication aims to reflect the process of both the investigation and the court in this case. Materials and methods. The implementation of research tasks was achieved through the use of documents from the Archives of the President of the Russian Federation and the Russian State Archive of Social and Political History. The methodological potential includes the philosophical principles of dialectics, namely objectivity, scientific nature, comprehensiveness, the unity of the historical, logical, etc. Their implementation helped to study documentary sources related to the case of V.S. Abakumov. Results. On the basis of the documents of the Archives of the President of the Russian Federation and the Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History, for the first time introduced into scientific circulation, information about the process of investigation and trial in the case of Abakumov is published. Conclusions. The charges against V.S. Abakumov were constantly changing. During the investigation, three indictments were prepared in his case, and the individual conclusions of each subsequent conclusion sometimes contradicted the previous one. The scenario for each subsequent indictment changed depending on who was in power at that time. The trial in the case of Abakumov was also well prepared. It took place in the presence of only party activists. The composition of the court was agreed, and politically proven lawyers were selected. At present, it is quite obvious that it was the first persons of the state, I.V. Stalin, G.M. Malenkov and L.P. Beria, who, for one reason or another, influenced the initiation of the investigation in the state security bodies. V.S. Abakumov is a zealous executor of the will of “their masters”, first of all Stalin and Beria.

Background. The relevance of the study is determined by the need for a comprehensive objective analysis of the removal from the post of Minister of State Security of the USSR V.S. Abakumov. The publication aims to reflect the process of activity of the Commission of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU(b) to investigate his case. Materials and methods. The implementation of research tasks was achieved using documents from the Archive of the President of the Russian Federation and the Russian State Archive of Social and Political History. Methodological potential includes: philosophical principles of dialectics, namely objectivity, scientific character, comprehensiveness, unity of historical, logical and others. Their implementation helped to study documentary sources related to the case of V.S. Abakumov. Results. On the basis of first introduced in the scientific use of documents of Archive of the President of the Russian Federation and Russian state archive of socio political history published information about the Commission’s investigation of the Politburo of the CPSU(b) in the case of V.S. Abakumov. It tells about the work of the Investigative Unit for particularly important cases of the Minister of State Security of the USSR, about the activities of which almost nothing is known. Conclusions. After being appointed to the post of head of the Minister of State Security of the USSR, V.S. Abakumov in his work focused mainly on L.P. Beria, he often turned to him for advice. In fact, Beria was an unofficial curator of the Minister of State Security of the USSR. The statement of the senior investigator of the Investigative Unit for Particularly important cases of the Minister of State Security, M.D. Ryumin, who signaled the unfavorable situation in the ministry with the investigation of a number of important cases, contributed to the removal of Abakumov from the post of minister. However, the main reason was not his statement, but the fact that Abakumov was becoming too independent, he alone made decisions on the conduct of the investigation, without informing Stalin about it. The leader was used to making his own decisions about whom and in what direction to conduct the investigation, but not the Minister of the Minister of State Security, who was supposed to be an intermediate link. Taking advantage of the situation, Stalin without regret removed the “presumptuous” minister.