Contest for Siberia Party Post : An Apparent First for Soviets: Secret Ballot and Real Election

MOSCOW â€”  The Soviet Union has conducted what appears to be its first secret-ballot, multiple-candidate election for a regional Communist Party post, according to media reports.

Two major newspapers and the official news agency Tass reported Tuesday on the outcome of an election for first secretary of a party district in far-off Siberia.

It’s not normally the stuff that makes headlines in the Moscow press, but this election was different: It had two candidates, and the winner was chosen by secret ballot.

What is more, there was even a “heated� but “businesslike� voters’ debate on the merits of Ivan Malkov, chairman of the city council in the Izhmorsky district of the Kemerovo region of western Siberia, and Gennady Sedykh, a state farm director.

Gorbachev’s Call

All this was apparently the first result of Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev’s call for secret-ballot, multiple-candidate elections of senior party officials by members of central committees at local, regional and republic levels.

The vote occurred despite a certain coolness to Gorbachev’s election proposal in the final resolution adopted by the national party’s Central Committee at the conclusion of its plenum last month. The final, official document made no mention of the general secretary’s explicit call for secret voting with more than one candidate on the ballot.

In the past, party elections were a mere formality. A single candidate was invariably chosen unanimously by a show of hands.

The Siberian election was by the 49 members of the Izhmorsky local district committee, and by Soviet standards--where winning margins of 99% are standard--the outcome was a squeaker: Malkov won, 29 to 20.

In launching what could be a Siberian trial balloon, the first secretary of the regional party, N. Ermakov, pronounced the election a success. However, he said, the whole process might come to be regarded as a “mistake� by higher party bodies. If so, he said, he is willing to be corrected.

Ermakov also expressed some reservations about the feelings of the losing contender. It may be, he said, that a defeated candidate will feel worthless and rejected despite his value to the party.

‘Rudeness and Arrogance’

During the voters’ debate, Malkov was upbraided for “rudeness and arrogance� by one opponent who added that he thought this fault could be changed. Other speakers praised him.

Tass said Sedykh played the role of a good loser, expressing thanks to the voters for their candor, and adding:

“I do not regard the election outcome as a tragedy. . . . The more trust we place in people, the greater control we exercise, and this in turn makes one more responsible for the assigned work.�