"New Cases Are Being Prepared". How former KGB majors Akinchytsy serve 15-year terms

First 5 years in prison, the rest – in a penal colony

Belsat received information about Yury and Iryna Akinchytsy's incarceration and sent an inquiry to Belpol, which shared an excerpt from the Supreme Court's verdict.

It was announced to the Akinchytsy on September 10, 2014. The Supreme Court heard the case in a closed session. Judge Aliaksandr Lupinovich presided at that time. Later, he notably heard the case of General Staff Captain Dzianis Urad, who was sentenced in 2021 to 18 years under Article 356 of the Criminal Code for treason. The human rights community recognized Urad as a political prisoner, noting that he acted in the public interest. In 2022, Lupinovich retired from his position as a Supreme Court judge.

The state prosecution in the Akinchytsy case was supported by Senior Prosecutor of the General Prosecutor's Office Mikalai Zhezchka, who in those years also acted as prosecutor in a number of other high-profile criminal cases — including the case of Aliaksandr Hrunou, sentenced to death, and later the case of former judges of the Economic Court of Minsk.

Yury Akinchyts was born on June 20, 1978, in Rudzensk, Pukhavichy District. He had a higher education, no previous convictions, and had served in the KGB since August 2000. According to Belsat's information, he worked in the economic division of the KGB.

In the verdict, he is listed as a major of military unit 10091. Akinchyts was awarded the "For Impeccable Service" medal, 3rd degree. At the time of his arrest, the family had two children, born in 2002 and 2012. Yury was detained on May 31, 2013.

Iryna Akinchyts was born on March 19, 1978, in Minsk. She also had a higher education, no previous convictions, served in the same military unit 10091, and held the rank of major. She had worked for the KGB since August 1999 and also had the "For Impeccable Service" medal, 3rd degree. According to Belsat's information, her work was related to foreign intelligence. Iryna was taken into custody on June 11, 2013.

Yury Akinchyts was found guilty under Part 1 of Article 356 of the Criminal Code. The verdict refers to "disclosing state secrets of the Republic of Belarus to a foreign state and its representative," espionage, and other assistance to a foreign state in activities detrimental to the national security of Belarus. According to Belsat's information, the foreign state in question was Poland.

Was there truly an act of espionage? According to Belpol's information, yes. It is believed that Yury Akinchyts allegedly betrayed Belarusian agents who were working in Poland during those years. There is no documentary confirmation of this, but such a version exists.

The excerpt from the verdict does not disclose exactly what secret information was transferred, to whom, or under what circumstances. It also contains no information about specific representatives of the Polish side. The trial was closed, so a significant part of the case's circumstances remains unknown to this day.

In addition to high treason, Yury was found guilty of forging a certificate and using a knowingly forged document. For this, he was separately sentenced to three months of arrest. For the aggregate of crimes, the final punishment was 15 years and one month of imprisonment. Akinchyts spent the first five years in prison, and the remaining term in a high-security penal colony.

Iryna Akinchyts was also sentenced under Part 1 of Article 356 of the Criminal Code. The court found her guilty of disclosing state secrets to a foreign state and its representative, as well as providing assistance to a foreign state in activities detrimental to the national security of Belarus. She was sentenced to 15 years of imprisonment: the first five years in prison, the subsequent ones in a general-regime penal colony.

Former political prisoner Dzmitry Mikhailau, who was incarcerated with Yury Akinchyts, says that his wife effectively "followed him by train." According to his information, she was not involved in the case. There is no official confirmation of this.

Both were stripped of their major ranks. In addition, Yury and Iryna were banned for five years from holding positions in security agencies and positions involving access to state secrets.

The court ruled that the sentence period would commence on September 10, 2014, but included the time spent in custody before the trial: for Yury — from May 31, 2013, for Iryna — from June 11, 2013.

Павялічыць

215 Million Rubles, Polish Vodka, and a Saber

In addition to the prison sentences, the Supreme Court ordered the joint recovery from the spouses of 215 million 680 thousand undenominated Belarusian rubles (21,568 rubles after denomination). In the verdict, this money was referred to as "income obtained by criminal means."

The recovery was also imposed on Yury Akinchyts's property, including: a 2011 Hyundai Accent car, Motorola L6 and Nokia E71 phones, 112 US dollars, and 1,700,150 Belarusian rubles before denomination.

Separately, the verdict listed material evidence. The court ordered the confiscation of 3000 euros, a saber in a scabbard, a bottle of Dębowa Polska Polish vodka, and the DVD "Bitwa pod Wiedniem".

The Supreme Court's verdict took effect immediately upon its announcement and, as stated in the document, was not subject to cassation appeal or protest.

"First two and a half years — in solitary confinement"

People who met Yury in the penal colony told Belsat how the Akinchytsy served their sentences after the trial. They emphasize that Akinchyts himself never shared details of the criminal case, the process was conducted in an exceptionally closed regime, and to avoid additional time, Yury chose a tactic of silence, as did his wife.

According to the interlocutor, after the verdict, both Yury and Iryna were sent to high-security prisons. He claims that both spent the first two and a half years in solitary confinement cells. They received no information about each other or their children. After that, according to him, they remained in prisons for approximately another two and a half years, but already in general cells.

Later, Yury was transferred to Correctional Colony No. 3 in Vitsebsk, and Iryna to a women's colony in Homiel.

Dzmitry Mikhailau names Yury Akinchyts's relationship with his children as one of the most difficult details in his story. He says he was personally in the colony when the children first came to visit Yury after his detention. According to his recollections, this was at the beginning of 2024.

Yury and Iryna also had virtually no contact with each other for many years. Another interlocutor claims that Yury was first able to receive news about his wife from his children when they came for a visit.

"For ten years, they had no information about each other, naturally, no information and no opportunity to correspond or speak with each other," says the interlocutor.

Belarusian Language and Preventive Registration

Former political prisoner Dzmitry Mikhailau, who was imprisoned with Akinchyts, describes him as a reserved but strong person. In the colony, Yury reads a lot, plays chess, and, according to several interlocutors, became a believer and attends church. Akinchyts works in the industrial zone of the colony. Initially, he worked in a woodworking shop, sawing logs into planks. After that shop closed, he was transferred to metal dismantling. According to another Belsat interlocutor, Akinchyts always tried to stay busy and looked for work.

Mikhailau recalls Yury Akinchyts's attitude towards the Belarusian language. According to him, Yury read a lot, was interested in Belarusian culture, and wrote his appeals to state bodies in Belarusian.

Once, Akinchyts wrote an appeal to the Supreme Court in Belarusian. After this, he was summoned to the colony administration and placed on preventive registration as "prone to suicide." This was done by Dzianis Fedchanka, Deputy Head of Correctional Colony No. 3 for regime and operational work, a major of internal service.

In practice, this means stricter control: the inmate is more often under the supervision of colony staff and undergoes additional checks. Belsat's interlocutors clarify that Akinchyts never had suicidal tendencies or attempts.

Akinchyts's interest in the Belarusian language was recorded long before his arrest. In 2009, Nasha Niva published an appeal from 203 representatives of science, culture, business, and students calling for wider use of the Belarusian language. "Yury Akinchyts, civil servant" was listed among the signatories.

Павялічыць

Lukashenka himself spoke about the espionage case

Even before the trial, the case gained public attention, although the authorities did not name its figures.

On July 26, 2013, Aliaksandr Lukashenka announced to journalists that a special services officer, whom he called a "traitor," had been detained in Belarus. According to him, this person was linked to foreign states through representatives of the Catholic Church.

"He not only passed on information, but through his activities, people working abroad suffered," Lukashenka said.

Lukashenka did not name the detained person at that time. However, it is known that Yury Akinchyts was detained on May 31, 2013, and later convicted of high treason and espionage.

On the same day, May 31, Catholic priest Uladzislau Lazar was detained. His detention became publicly known later. In July, Catholic Church representative Yury Sanko confirmed the fact of the detention itself, but at the time did not claim that Lazar's case was related precisely to the "spy scandal" that Lukashenka had mentioned a few days earlier.

In September 2013, more specific information emerged. According to a KGB report, referenced by the Catholic Church and independent media, Lazar was accused of transferring money and material valuables to a person accused of espionage for another state. Lazar himself denied guilt.

Lazar was accused under the same Article 356 of the Criminal Code — "treason against the state," but as an accomplice. He spent more than half a year in the KGB pre-trial detention center, after which he was released on his own recognizance. Ultimately, his case did not reach trial.

Павялічыць

New Criminal Case

The Akinchytsy spouses were supposed to be released in June 2028. However, Belsat's interlocutors, including Dzmitry Mikhailau, claim that new criminal cases are being prepared against both Yury and Iryna for malicious disobedience to the requirements of the correctional facility administration.

In the prison environment, this practice is often called "raskrutka" (spinning up new charges): the convicted person is successively issued disciplinary penalties, declared a malicious violator of the regime, after which these materials can become grounds for a new criminal case.

As a result, he says, the administration records a large number of violations and claims that the inmate systematically disobeys its requirements.

At the time of the conversation, according to the interlocutor, Iryna had already been moved from the Homiel colony to the pre-trial detention center (SIZA), while Yury was in a cell-type facility (PKT) at IK-3 in Vitsebsk.

He claims that the administration of IK-3 also prepared documents regarding Yury and sent them for consideration of bringing him to responsibility under Article 411.

As far as is known, generally around 2024, the colony administration's attitude towards Yury Akinchyts significantly worsened. He began to be periodically sent to the punishment isolator. The interlocutor speaks of lengthy terms — 30-40 days in the punishment isolator (ShIZO), as well as transfers from one detachment to another.

Around the same period, pressure also began on his wife. In May 2026, "Viasna" reported that Iryna Akinchyts was regularly being sent to the punishment isolator (ShIZO) and cell-type facility (PKT). A former political prisoner, referenced by "Viasna," believed this was specifically linked to the article under which Akinchyts was convicted.

However, Belsat does not have court rulings confirming that the Akinchytsy have already been convicted under Article 411. Therefore, information about a possible new term should be regarded as source testimony.

The interlocutor himself believes that each of them could have another year or two added to their imprisonment. Furthermore, he states that Iryna has a serious oncological disease related to the brain, and her relatives do not have full information about her current condition.

When asked why the spouses might be under such pressure, the interlocutor replies: "They are their personal enemies because they were civil servants. Many years have passed since their conviction, but they are periodically mentioned in the newspaper 'Na Strazhe' (On Guard), which is published for internal use and distributed only among KGB employees (not to be confused with the publicly available newspaper 'Na Strazhe' published by the Ministry of Internal Affairs)."

Can the pressure on them be considered politically motivated?

In a comment to Belsat, Viasna's lawyer Sviatlana Halounyova explains that a person's status itself — whether they are an opposition politician, journalist, human rights defender, or other public figure — is not the determining factor.

By "political motive," human rights defenders understand the authorities' interest, hidden behind legal charges, in persecuting an individual to consolidate or retain power, as well as to forcibly stop or change the nature of their public activities. This understanding has been developed by a coalition of Belarusian human rights organizations and is based, among other things, on the practice of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

The human rights defender emphasizes: for a conclusion about the political nature of persecution, it is not so much who the person is, but what exactly they are accused of, how the authorities act, and what their real motives might be.

In some cases, the article of the Criminal Code itself can indicate the political nature of the persecution. In other cases, the human rights community focuses on the totality of the case's circumstances — for example, gross violations of fair trial standards or lack of access to the details of the charges.

According to the human rights defender, this is especially relevant for cases involving clandestine activities, espionage, or terrorism, where due to the closed nature of the proceedings, human rights defenders often do not have the opportunity to fully study the essence of the charges.

Павялічыць

As for torture, cruel or inhumane treatment, by themselves, they do not automatically lead to the conclusion that the persecution has a political motive. For this, the human rights defender explains, one must understand the purpose of such treatment. If this purpose meets the criteria of a political motive, then the cruel treatment itself can be considered part of politically motivated persecution.

However, such a conclusion, the human rights defender emphasizes, requires a detailed study of the motives of those who make decisions regarding the inmate.

At the same time, "Viasna" has for some time been observing a broader trend: harsh practices in the Belarusian penitentiary system affect not only people whose persecution is recognized as politically motivated.

Torture, cruel and inhumane treatment, used within politically motivated persecution, also extends to other people who enter the penitentiary system.

• 1
• 0
• 1
• 6
• 0
• 1
• 3
• 0