A-7941615
Decided by Central Office May 3, 1951
Subversive, adherent of principles directed toward destruction of free competitive enterprise, etc. — Act of June 25, 1948, as amended — "Voluntary" nature thereof — Evidence of ideological conviction.
While a governmental or public institution, such as an institution of learning, in a totalitarian country (Russia in this case), must carry out the directives and serve the purposes of the party and of the Government in power, any adherence to the political or economic system or philosophy of the Communist Party of Russia and of the Government of the Soviet Union on the part of a teacher and supervisor of three teachers in a Russian school run by the Government (September 1940 to June 1941) was found to be involuntary under the circumstances evidenced in this case, and the alien was not found to be inadmissable under the provisions of section 13 of the act of June 25, 1948, as amended.
EXCLUDED BY BOARD OF SPECIAL INQUIRY:
Act of June 25, 1948, as amended — Adhered to etc. the principles of any political or economic system or philosophy directed toward the destruction of free competitive enterprise etc.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL OFFICE
Discussion: The record relates to a 29-year-old single male, native and citizen of Russia, who applied for admission into the United States for permanent residence, at Munich, Germany, on November 24, 1950. He was held for examination before a Board of Special Inquiry which at the conclusion of the hearing on December 29, 1950, held him to be inadmissable on the grounds stated above. He has appealed from such decision.
The record discloses that appellant attended school in Russia from 1928 to 1940, at which time he finished a teacher's course. From September 1940 to June 1941 he was a teacher in a primary school in Dombrovice, Russia, which territory had been part of Poland but was taken over by the Russian Government in 1939. The school was operated by the district government of public education and appellant was the supervisor of three other teachers at this school. Appellant reported to the supervisor of the district department of public education and consulted with him about once every 3 months.
Appellant testified that a course in history was not taught in the school he conducted or supervised. He claimed that no members of the pioneer or Komsomol groups were in attendance at the school, and that neither he nor the other three teachers belonged to a guild or organization of teachers. Appellant testified that he taught the Ukrainian and Russian languages, botany, and physical culture at this school.
His father had been a kulak, as a result of which he was persecuted in that the assets of his father, including the home, were confiscated and his father given a 6-month sentence at forced labor. He belonged to no trade union because he was the son of a kulak. When he first obtained employment he did not disclose his ancestry but subsequently, it was known to the director of the teachers' courses that he was the son of a kulak. He was never approached to join the Communist Party or its affiliates, never attended any meetings conducted by members of the Communist Party, was persecuted by the Communists, and is anti-Communist.
The issue of whether appellant is inadmissable under the provisions of section 13 of the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as amended, in that by virtue of his employment as a primary school supervisor and teacher by the Russian Government he adhered to, advocated, or followed the principles of a political or economic system or philosophy directed toward the destruction of free competitive enterprise and a revolutionary overthrow of representative governments.
We recognize the fact that a governmental or public institution, such as an institution of learning, in a totalitarian country, must carry out the directives, and serve the purposes, of the party and of the government in power.
The applicant has testified that he did not have ideological conviction or belief in the doctrines of the party and of the government in power. According to the record, he was never intentionally active in the promotion of such doctrines, by word or act. After appropriate security clearances, there is no evidence of reliable information to the contrary. In the light of the foregoing, we find that any adherence to, advocacy or following of, the political or economic system or philosophy of the Communist Party of Russia and of the Government of the Soviet Union, on the part of appellant, was not voluntary, and therefore is not a basis for exclusion.
Order: It is ordered that the appeal be sustained and the applicant be found admissible to the United States upon securing a valid replacement visa.