Legal assessment

In contemporary Belarus, the banning of books has evolved into a systematic and deliberate policy aimed at suppressing dissent and establishing total control over the information space. Books – sources of ideas, historical memory, and artistic expression – have become a primary target in a broader campaign against fundamental freedoms, as extensively documented by PEN Belarus and other human rights organisations.

Belarusian state censorship operates through three interrelated mechanisms, creating a comprehensive system of repression:

• Designation of books as “extremist materials”.
  This quasi-judicial process is triggered by a state-appointed commission and concluded with a court ruling. Inclusion in the “National List of Extremist Materials” carries severe legal consequences, including administrative liability for producing, publishing, possessing, or transporting the banned book. In practice, the scope of “prohibited acts” is applied excessively broadly. Sanctions range from heavy fines to administrative arrest, creating a powerful deterrent for authors, publishers, and readers.

• Labelling books as “harmful to national interests”.
  This mechanism is purely administrative and does not require judicial oversight. Based on the same commission’s conclusions, a book is added to a separate list. Although formal legal liability for distributing such books is absent, publication or creation exposes authors and publishers to serious risk of criminal prosecution. The vague and open-ended wording allows for arbitrary application.
• Unpublished bans and “purges” in the education field.
  Beyond formal lists, a third, hidden but equally effective instrument exists. This involves unofficial directives to withdraw books from shops and libraries, as well as the systematic exclusion of works from school and university curricula.

The existence of these three parallel systems is no coincidence. Together, they form a deliberate and multi-layered strategy of control. The official lists of “extremist” and “harmful” materials serve as tools of direct repression, designed to instil fear.

The “extremist” list functions as a surgical instrument, used to eliminate specific works and authors deemed most dangerous by the authorities, with immediate legal consequences.

The list of “harmful” books fulfils a subtler role: it generates a constant sense of threat and uncertainty, pushing the cultural community into self-censorship. The third mechanism – informal and unpublished bans – operates over the long term, shaping a sterile, ideologically filtered cultural space in which dissent and critical thought are extinguished at their very roots, in education and creativity. In this way, the regime shifts the repressive function onto society and the education system itself, creating a form of control that is more effective and pervasive than straightforward censorship alone.

The practice of arbitrary book bans in Belarus directly contradicts the core principles of national legislation, first and foremost, the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus. While the state declares at the highest legal level its commitment to cultural rights, in practice, it has created a legal mechanism that systematically nullifies them.

The Constitution of the Republic of Belarus explicitly guarantees the right of every individual to “participate in cultural life”, which is ensured, among other things, through “universal access to the treasures of national and global culture” and the development of cultural and educational institutions. It also guarantees freedom of artistic, scientific, and educational creativity (Article 51).

The banning of a book constitutes a direct denial of this right. For the author, it is an attack on creative freedom; for the reader, it is a forced exclusion from cultural dialogue and the deprivation of access to part of their cultural heritage. When the state decides which books are allowed to exist and which are not, it replaces free participation in cultural life with the compulsory consumption of ideologically approved products.

The Constitution also prohibits censorship and monopolisation of the media (Article 33). It guarantees citizens the right to receive, store, and disseminate complete, accurate, and timely information about political, economic, cultural, and international life (Article 34). The banning of books is an act of censorship that strikes at both pillars of this right: the author’s freedom to express ideas and the reader’s freedom to seek, access, and analyse information to form their own views.

Finally, the state bears responsibility for safeguarding the historical, cultural, and spiritual heritage of the people, as well as for ensuring the free development of all national communities (Article 15 of the Constitution). Taken together, these provisions establish a constitutional standard wholly incompatible with arbitrary and unjustified book bans.

In addition to the Constitution, the current practice also violates specific legislation – namely, the Code of Culture of the Republic of Belarus, which elaborates constitutional norms.

Article 2 of the Code names “universal access to cultural values” as one of the key principles of cultural policy. The creation of lists of prohibited literature and the persecution of those who possess such books runs directly counter to this principle.

Article 35 of the Code enshrines the right to participate in cultural life. This right becomes a fiction when access to artistic works, particularly books, is restricted for opaque and politically motivated reasons.

Article 38 of the Code guarantees the right to obtain, preserve, and disseminate complete, accurate, and timely information about cultural life. The removal of books from libraries, shops, and the public domain constitutes a blatant violation of this right. Citizens are deprived not only of access to the works themselves, but also of information about their very existence.

The actions of the Belarusian authorities in banning books represent not only a violation of national legislation, but also a direct breach of the international obligations undertaken by the Republic of Belarus. Having ratified key international treaties in the field of human rights, the state is bound to respect, protect, and fulfil the rights enshrined therein, including the freedom of expression and cultural rights.

Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966, to which Belarus is a party, protects the right to freedom of expression. This right encompasses “freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds”. The Covenant permits restrictions on this right, but they must pass a strict three-part test:

Be established by law: Belarusian legislation on “extremism” and “harm to national interests” is drafted in such vague and overly broad terms that it fails to meet the requirement of legal certainty. Concepts such as “incitement of other social hostility” (often applied to criticism of government officials) or “harm to national interests” are open to arbitrary interpretation, depriving the law of predictability.

Pursue a legitimate aim: The state may invoke the protection of national security or public order. Yet when these aims are used to justify the banning of historical monographs, poetry collections, or even manuals on BDSM, it becomes clear that the true purpose is not the protection of legitimate interests, but the suppression of dissent and cultural diversity – objectives which are not legitimate under Article 19.

Be necessary and proportionate: The bans imposed in Belarus fail the test of necessity and proportionality. The lack of independent, evidence-based expert assessment, the secrecy of procedures, and the sweeping scope of restrictions are measures that are clearly excessive and unnecessary in a democratic society.

Accordingly, current practice constitutes not a lawful restriction, but a direct violation of Article 19 of the ICCPR.

Article 15 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 1966 recognises the right of every person to take part in cultural life. This right imposes not only a negative obligation on the state to refrain from interfering in cultural life, but also a positive obligation to “conserve, develop, and disseminate the achievements of science and culture”.

The actions of the Belarusian authorities represent the complete inversion of these obligations. Rather than conserving and disseminating culture, the state actively confiscates, bans, and destroys it. The prohibition of works is an act directly opposed to the “development and dissemination” of culture. This is not merely a failure to comply with Article 15 of the ICESCR, but a deliberate and wilful breach.

On 4 August 2006, the Republic of Belarus ratified the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. This makes the current policy of censorship particularly cynical.

Article 2 of the Convention sets out guiding principles, with a central place given to the “Principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms”. It explicitly notes that the protection and promotion of cultural diversity is “only possible if human rights and fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of expression, information and communication, are guaranteed”.

Belarus’s policy of banning books is in direct contradiction with both the spirit and the letter of this Convention. Instead of promoting diversity, the state enforces ideological and cultural uniformity, destroying any works that do not fit within the narrow confines of the official doctrine. This applies not only to politically charged literature, but also to works that explore complex historical periods, contemporary poetry of solidarity, or themes deemed “alien” by the authorities.

Thus, while Belarus formally participates in international mechanisms designed to safeguard cultural diversity, within its own borders it pursues a policy of systematic eradication.

A particularly alarming aspect is the way in which these bans are implemented. The Belarusian authorities do not act through straightforward administrative orders. Instead, they construct an elaborate façade that imitates legal procedure. This phenomenon can best be described as the imitation of legal process – the use of outward legal form to legitimise what are arbitrary and repressive decisions.

The process of designating a book as “extremist” or “harmful” is formally presented as legal. A so-called Republican Expert Commission issues conclusions, and in the case of “extremism”, a court hearing is held. Yet, on closer inspection, this structure proves to be a fiction:

Composition of the commission: the commission is composed entirely of state officials, members of parliament, and representatives of law enforcement agencies. Independent experts in literature, history, or the arts are absent, predetermining its accusatory bias and political partisanship.

Quality of the assessments: according to human rights observers, the commission’s conclusions are formulaic and superficial. They contain no substantive analysis of texts, merely repeating generic legislative wording without offering any evidence of “extremism” or “harm”.

Court proceedings: hearings are typically held behind closed doors and in a simplified manner, excluding public scrutiny. Authors, publishers, and other interested parties face immense obstacles in attending proceedings or presenting their case. Avenues for appeal are also severely restricted.

This system is not merely an imperfect legal mechanism, but a deliberately constructed façade designed to give a semblance of legality to what is, in fact, political censorship. An analysis of book-banning practices in Belarus makes one conclusion unavoidable: these are not isolated errors or excesses, but a deliberate state policy that constitutes a grave and systematic violation of both national law and the fundamental international legal obligations of the Republic of Belarus. These actions must be characterised as arbitrary, disproportionate, and lacking any legitimate legal foundation.

Book bans are not a peripheral measure but an integral element of the broader campaign to suppress civil society and eradicate all forms of dissent—a campaign thoroughly documented by leading international and independent national human rights organisations.

In this context, documenting every single instance of censorship becomes critically important. The work of civil society organisations operating in this field is of extraordinary significance, and it will continue despite the most severe violations and repression by the Belarusian authorities.

List of the books 

Books are declared “extremist” and added to the list by court ruling.

Court hearings are usually held behind closed doors and in a simplified procedure. In many cases, the only evidence of “extremism” is the opinion of the National Commission for the Assessment of Symbols, Attributes and Information Products for Signs of Extremism.

According to human rights defenders and independent media investigations, the commission’s conclusions contain no clear reasoning. Their findings consist primarily of generic references to legislation and are almost identical, regardless of the wide variety of books and materials reviewed.

The commission is composed entirely of MPs, state officials, law enforcement representatives, and lecturers from state universities. It does not include independent experts. Its membership is fixed by Resolution No. 575 of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus, dated 12 October 2021.

In theory, one may file a petition to participate in the trial, but in practice, this is extremely difficult due to:

• restricted access to information about the date, time, and place of hearings;
• closed nature of the proceedings;
• the need for specific court permission to participate;
• refusals to allow remote participation;
• difficulty in proving a personal connection to the book (unless you are the author).

The law does not provide a separate procedure for removing books from the list. The only basis for removal is the annulment of the court’s ruling. An appeal may be lodged only by a person recognised by the court as an interested party.

On 11 March 2024, there was a single case of reversal: the court annulled its previous ruling of 8 November 2023 that had placed the two-volume collected works of Belarusian literary classic Vincent Dunin-Marcinkievič on the “National List of Extremist Materials”.

• The National List of Extremist Materials is published:
  • On the website of the Ministry of Information of the Republic of Belarus,
  • In the state-run newspaper Respublika and Zviazda.

PEN Belarus publishes a selected list of works of fiction, history, and scientific literature that have been labelled “extremist materials” since 2020.

Administrative liability applies for distributing, storing, publishing, or transporting books declared “extremist materials”, if done with the purpose of distribution (Article 19.11, Part 2 of the Code of Administrative Offences).

Sanctions:
for physical persons:

• a fine of 10-30 base units *
• administrative arrest of up to 15 dayscompulsory community service

for individual entrepreneurs:

• • a fine of 50-100 base units *

for legal entities:

• a fine of 100-500 base units *
  

Additionally, the “object and means of the offence” may be confiscated – for example, the book itself, a mobile phone, or a laptop.

* 1 base unit = 42 BYN (about 10 EUR)

Forms of distribution may include:

• • • sending or handing over a book, including via the internet;
    • sharing a hyperlink to the book in your own publications;
    • posting or reposting the book or excerpts on social media;
    • publishing a public review of the bookу.

Courts usually presume the “intent to distribute” when a book is stored or transported, without collecting further evidence.

Books, printed editions, and informational materials.

List of the books

Books are labelled as potentially “causing harm to the national interests of the Republic of Belarus” based on the opinion of the National Commission for the Assessment of Symbols, Attributes, and Information Products for the presence (or absence) of “signs of possible harm to the national interests of Belarus”.

According to human rights defenders and investigations by independent media, the commission’s conclusions contain no clear reasoning. Their findings consist primarily of generic references to legislation and are virtually identical, regardless of the wide range of books and materials under review.

The commission is composed entirely of MPs, state officials, law enforcement representatives, and lecturers from state universities. No independent experts sit on the commission. Its membership is fixed by Resolution No. 575 of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus, dated 12 October 2021.

• The labelling of books takes place through an administrative procedure. There is no special process for defending a book or challenging the commission’s decision. The law does not provide a procedure for removing books from the list. Removal could only occur if a decision were annulled.

To date, no case of annulment or removal of a book from this list has been recorded.

The list of books is published on the website of the Ministry of Information of the Republic of Belarus. PEN Belarus publishes the list on its website.

• Formally, there is no specific provision establishing liability for possession or distribution of books from this list.

However, Article 361 of the Criminal Code establishes criminal liability for actions aimed at causing harm to the national security of the Republic of Belarus.

Punishments include restriction of liberty for up to five years, or imprisonment for up to six years, with or without an additional fine.

Given the excessively broad application of “anti-extremist” and other repressive legislation, there is a clear risk that this article may be used to punish authors and publishers of books included in the list.