Abstract: The subject of this research is the mechanism of formation of the single-party political system in Soviet Russia, and dislodgement by the Bolsheviks of opposition parties from the political and electoral process. The article reconstructs the methods of struggle of Bolsheviks against opposition in the course of elections and between election periods, as well as reviews statistical data on the participation of parties in Council elections and different levels of the Congresses of Soviets. The author reveals the role of agitation-propagandistic, repressive, and administrative means of struggle between Bolsheviks and opposition parties, and results of implementation of such methods. The scientific novelty consists in comprehensive examination and classification of the means of struggle of Bolsheviks against opposition parties during the first Council electoral campaigns. The first methods have formed at the elections of 1918, and later undergone extensions and amendments. The range of means of struggle against opposition includes the agitation-propagandistic, repressive, and administrative pressuring. The key role in liquidation of multi-party system was carried out by the repressive and agitation-propagandistic methods, which were not the method used in elections specifically, but produced most significant effect upon the electoral process. Diverse methods of administrative pressuring , such as restriction of pre-election agitation, ban on the speeches of opposition parties representatives, prohibitions on publicizing the lists of opposition candidate (prohibition on participation in the elections), compulsory re-voting, were applied directly at the elections and served as supplements to the more coarse measures of repressive character.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the involvement of the People's Commissariat for Internal Affairs and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee in organization of elections to Soviets and congresses of Soviets during the establishment of the Soviet State from 1917 to 1924.  Due to the absence of the nationwide specialized elective body, the key role in leading the election campaigns in RSFSR throughout the indicated period belonged to NKVD. The article describes the peculiarities of establishment and exercise of powers of People’s Commissariat in organization of elections. The scientific novelty lies in examination of the role of the supreme and central Soviet bodies in the organization of election campaigns during the establishment of the Soviet State based on the newly introduced to the scientific discourse archival materials and published sources. Soviet organization of elective bodies significantly reproduced the prerevolutionary model, and suggested the creation of specialized elective bodies at the local levels while retaining a substantial role of administrative branches under the authority of NKVD. The People’s Commissariat did not consider the organization of elections for Internal Affairs as a priority sphere of activity, which led to a chaotic and unsystematic exercise of powers in leading the election campaigns. Ineffective exercise of powers with regard to elections by the central apparatus of NKVD, as well as its territorial branches, logically led to reorganization of NKVD apparatus and delegation of these powers to subdivisions of VTsIK and executive committees of the Soviets.

Abstract: The subject of this study is the terms, conditions and implementation of the recall of deputies in the period of the Soviet political system. The opinion of the Deputy had a limited distribution in the world and domestic practice, in the first quarter of the twentieth century. Came to power, the Bolsheviks introduced a recall of a Deputy in the Soviet electoral system, considering it an important form of direct democracy, revising the mechanism of interaction of deputies and voters. Contrary to initial plans, the recall of a Deputy in the Soviet reality, did not become a form of "genuine proletarian democracy" was implemented under the directives, top-down, and was not supported by any broad initiative of the population. However, the recall of the Deputy was not and meaningful way of dealing with opposition deputies, the Bolsheviks used the more cruel political practices to displace disloyal members of the councils.The study is based on the methodological principles of historicism, system analysis and objectivity. The principle of historicism allows us to consider the evolution of the institution of recall of deputies in the context of the historical era. Systems approach and structural-functional analysis allowed us to determine the mechanism of recall of deputies as well as the place of the Institute in the Soviet electoral system.The novelty of the research consists of a comprehensive study of the legal regulation of the grounds, conditions and procedure for the implementation of the recall of deputies at the stage of formation of the Soviet electoral system. For the first time introduced into scientific circulation sources helped to reveal the mechanism of functioning, the real value of the Institute and the problems of implementation of the recall of deputies in Soviet political practice.Until the mid-1920's the institution of recall of deputies could not find the real development in the Soviet legislation and practice. During the period of implementation of the policy of "revival" of the Soviets (1925-1929) opinion was considered as a measure of the revitalization of the Council deputies, in the Soviet law there were specified grounds, conditions and order of revocation. In practice, the recall of a Deputy remained unclaimed. The recall of a Deputy of the forms of direct will of the voter has become one of the forms of organizational-mass work of the Soviets. In the 1930s the recall of a Deputy was one of the elements of the mechanism of identification and suppression of "class enemies", but not widespread.

Abstract: The subject of this research is the reasons and conditions of mass cancellation (cessation) of the election results of the winter of 1924/25, which was a unique event in the Soviet political history. The established within historiography position on this matter, as a result of high level of absenteeism of population and formalization of electoral process, must be subjected to significant amendment. The causes of mass cancellation of the elections should be examined in the context of opposition inside the party, as well as socioeconomic and political development of the country. Essential factors, which justified the declaration of a “new course” and cancellation of elections, became the strive of grouping in party leadership that insisted in implementation of the more liberal course (in contradiction of the one suggested by L. Trotsky) for ensuring the advantage in retention of power alongside the support of population. The scientific novelty is substantiated by the introduction into the discourse of the new sources and innovative interpretation of the events associated with the mass cancellation of the elections of 1924, as well as development of the Soviet electoral system. The author underlines the transformation of the electoral model, characterized by the weakening of party-state pressure upon population and implementation of the limited alternativeness. The common electoral practice in the late 1920’s was the involvement of broad range of urban and rural population in the elections, free nomination and discussion of the candidates, requirements and mandates to the new Councils. The new reality became the rejection from the formal semi-mandatory voting for previously approved lists of candidates. Within the framework of the achieved consensus on the elections of the late 1920’s, the country’s leadership was able to expand the trust towards the authorities; the population received the opportunity of a direct dialogue with the government, as well as the ability to delegate their representatives and voice their demands.