Belarus has escalated its campaign against the independent book trade by placing three publishing figures on a wanted list. The move follows searches and detentions in February and the classification of publishers, cultural organisations and individuals as “extremist formations” in March.
Media reports on 8 October 2026 said the Interior Ministry had placed Ihar Lohvinau, Andrei Yanushkevich and Yaroslav Ivanyuk on the list between 6 and 8 October. The reports did not specify the legal grounds for the decision. But the timing points to a widening effort aimed not only at publishers, but at the businesses and relationships that allow books to be printed, sold and distributed.
A pressure campaign with a wider reach
Security forces carried out systematic searches and detentions in February among staff at both active and closed publishing houses. Entrepreneurs involved in selling and distributing books were also targeted. The reported action therefore reached beyond the contents of particular titles and into the premises, staff and commercial arrangements behind them.
In March, the authorities compiled a list of people and organisations from the printing and publishing sector classified as “extremist formations”. It included the foundation, Lohvinau Publishing House, Andrei Yanushkevich Publishing and Gutenberg Publisher.
The list also named Dmitry Kolas, Vaclav Bohdanovich, Aliaksandr Yevdaha, Lohvinau, Yanushkevich and Ivanyuk. That does not establish that every person or organisation faces the same proceedings. It does show how publishers, cultural projects and private business operators have been brought into a common administrative and law-enforcement framework.
The classification carries practical consequences even for companies not directly named in a case. Printers, booksellers, transport firms and other suppliers may decide that working with a listed publisher creates unacceptable exposure. A label applied to one organisation can therefore affect an entire chain of ordinary business relationships.
Why the book trade is vulnerable
A publishing operation depends on more than a manuscript and a printing press. Someone must select and prepare the text, arrange financing, commission a print run, store the copies and move them to shops or readers. Small independent publishers often rely on a limited number of printers, warehouses, distributors and retailers.
Pressure on any one of those links can interrupt the whole process. A search may make stock, documents or equipment temporarily inaccessible. The closure of a company can disrupt contracts and supply arrangements. An official designation can prompt commercial partners to withdraw before they themselves become exposed to scrutiny.
The effect is particularly significant for Belarusian-language books and works dealing with the country’s history and culture. Independent publishers help decide which authors and subjects reach the public through channels outside state-controlled media. Their role is cultural as well as commercial, although the available reports do not establish that the authorities have formally banned every publication produced by the organisations concerned.
Nor does the information available here establish the precise allegations against Lohvinau, Yanushkevich and Ivanyuk. Being placed on a wanted list may expose them to arrest and further legal restrictions, while making it harder for colleagues and business partners to maintain contact. Whether identical proceedings have been opened against all three is not clear.
From individual cases to a network under strain
The chronology suggests a broadening field of pressure. In February, the focus was on employees and entrepreneurs. In March, organisations and additional figures from the sector were included in the “extremist formations” list. The October announcement has placed three recognisable publishing figures under direct personal pressure.
That progression matters because the state does not need to close every bookshop or prohibit every title in order to narrow access to independent publishing. If a printer refuses an order, a distributor abandons a route or a shop removes a catalogue, the practical availability of a book can fall without a public ban on that individual work.
The same mechanism can also discourage new projects. Authors may hesitate to sign with an independent publisher, suppliers may avoid contracts and readers may find fewer reliable ways to obtain books. The immediate impact is commercial disruption; over time, the consequences may reach the language, historical interpretation and cultural debate that those books carry.
Zerkalo reported the wanted-list announcements and the earlier designations. The next question is whether the authorities will bring concrete proceedings against the three men and whether more publishers, distributors or cultural organisations will be drawn into the same system of pressure.
