people’s control

The issue of the historical succession of the organizational and institutional mechanism of people’s control in the USSR by the modern system of public control: A political and legal aspect

Introduction. At present, an obvious scientific interest in the Soviet historical experience of constructing political institutions and organizing public administration is growing. In this context, there is an urgent need to compare and identify the generic qualities of people’s control in the USSR and public control in the Russian Federation, to clarify the general and specific patterns of their development, to conduct a comparative analysis of the ideological, conceptual, regulatory, legal, and organizational and institutional characteristics of the phenomena under consideration. Theoretical analysis. People’s control in the USSR and public control in the Russian Federation have a lot in common, especially in the context of assessing their social nature and essence. Theoretically, both phenomena characterize the content of the democratic foundations of the constitutional system and are considered the most important guarantee and condition for the implementation of democracy in a political system of a certain type. The authors also single out separate content aspects that characterize the authenticity of both types of control, which are manifested to a greater extent in their essential definition and intended purpose. Public control is an integral feature and, at the same time, a function of civil society - the sphere of self-organization and activity of free citizens and their associations. The theoretical and methodological configuration of people’s control was based on considering it as an auxiliary control function for the state, not of society, but of the people as a political community of all citizens of the USSR. Empirical analysis. It was revealed that people’s control in the USSR and public control in the Russian Federation are characterized by a high degree of legal regulation. The authors highlight the main differences of both types of control. These differences are of an organizational and institutional nature and refer to features of the subject-object composition, forms and results of activities. Results. The retrospective study of the genesis of public control and the practical implementation of the conceptual paradigm at the present stage of the development of the Russian Federation allows us to defi ne it as the result of the institutional historical succession of the forms of democracy that developed during the Soviet period of the functioning of the national political system.

 Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2022, vol. 22, iss. 4
Formation of people’s control in the USSR, forms and methods of its implementation (The case study of the Saratov Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection of the first half of the 1920s)

Introduction. The study of the Soviet experience in the formation of the legal foundations of the welfare state, the involvement of workers in the management of public affairs, ensuring equality of rights, freedoms and opportunities for their implementation, is becoming increasingly relevant. The study of the experience of the organization and functioning of the institution of people’s control in the RSFSR and the early years of the USSR is of particular interest, since this institution was inextricably linked with the ideology of building a new type of the state, implemented in the system of socialist governance and was an example of the practical implementation of the principle of direct and permanent exercise of power by workers. Theoretical analysis. In the conditions of the developing Soviet state apparatus, there was a need to create a special system of bodies that would systematically monitor the activities of enterprises, organizations and institutions, monitor the execution of decrees and resolutions of the Soviet government. The ideas of combining state and public control were embodied in the creation of the legal basis for the activities of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection, which became a single body of socialist control. The RKIs were assigned duties of various legal nature: political, legal, administrative and economic control. Empirical analysis. The study of archival documents allowed us to consider the application of the mechanisms of formation and activity of the RKI bodies in the Saratov province in the early 1920s. The main problem of the creation and activity of RKI assistance groups during this period was the lack of understanding of the goals of their creation by workers and, as a result, the unwillingness of workers and especially peasants to take part in their work. RKI controllers usually had no experience in auditing activities, so their reports, as a rule, did not analyze the causes of the identified shortcomings, did not mention the measures taken. Most often the controllers recorded cases of mismanagement or abuse, without giving them any assessment. In the mid-1920s, the activities of the provincial and district RKIs acquired a planned character, the directions of control and audit activities were determined by the governing party bodies. Control measures in the period of 1924–1928 began to be carried out more consistently and professionally. Results. In the early 1920s, socialist control was of a syncretic state-public nature, and there was a search for forms and methods of its implementation. The Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection, by its political and legal nature, was an institutionalized result of the empirical development of the concept of socialist democracy, which outwardly reflected Lenin’s ideas of popular control in the system of governance of the Soviet state. This body fully met the needs of the new political system, which assumed a radical revision of the forms and methods of governance, including the pre-revolutionary methodology of control and supervision. The participation of the population in the processes of public administration was considered an integral element of state-building, which was to radically change the established system of power relations.

 Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2021, vol. 21, iss. 4
Historical, legal, ideological and political prerequisites for the formation and development of the institution of people’s control in the USSR

Introduction. The controversial nature of most of the aspects related to the content and essence of people’s control, the assessment of its historical role and significance in the system of state administration of the Soviet period, the effectiveness of legal regulation and the political problems of its implementation still arouses a genuine interest of the scientific community in the study of this phenomenon. Theoretical analysis. People’s control in the USSR was both a developed ideological and political concept and a real political and legal institution. The founder of the concept of people’s control was V. I. Lenin, who, in his numerous works, described a clear justification of its relevance in the conditions of socialist democracy. Empirical analysis. It was revealed that the process of development of the institution of people’s control in Soviet Russia was largely influenced by the worldview of the country’s top leadership, which demonstrated polymorphism of opinions on the role and significance of popular control in the system of socialist governance. There are three stages of formation and functioning of the system of people’s control in Soviet Russia, which had their organizational and institutional features. Results. The study of the ideological, political and historical and legal prerequisites for formation of popular control led to the conclusion that popular control was a specific institution characteristic of the socialist type of government. It passed a rather difficult historical path: from workers’ control in the first years of Soviet power to a very complex organizational and institutional system of state and public control in the last decades of the existence of the USSR.

 Izv. Sarat. Univ. Economics. Management. Law, 2021, vol. 21, iss. 3