Important Draft Laws. Issue 45: Preparing for National Resistance, Simplifying Oversight of Declarations, and Changes to Lobbying Rules

These proposals aim to establish a new system for preparing citizens for national resistance, relax oversight of illicit enrichment and income declarations by public officials, and introduce state support for producers of organic and artisanal products. Lawmakers also propose changes to the rules on military service, reservations, and penalties for violations of military registration procedures.

Improving the system for preparing citizens for national resistance

Currently, the law defines the preparation of citizens for national resistance as measures aimed at fostering patriotism and developing the knowledge and skills necessary to defend Ukraine. This training is organized by state authorities and local governments and is based on general military training. It includes initial training (basic military knowledge and skills taught in schools, particularly in “Defense of Ukraine” classes) and basic training (more advanced instruction in vocational schools, colleges, universities, and during separate training assemblies). In schools, initial training is provided to senior students (grades 10–11); in higher education institutions, basic training is offered to upper-year students; and training assemblies are held for those preparing for military service or professional development. At the same time, there is no unified program or specialized institution for systematically training adult citizens who have already completed their education.

Bill No. 13347 proposes replacing initial and basic general military training in the legislation with training for national resistance targeted at students. Starting October 1, 2026, this training will be conducted in all secondary and higher education institutions, except military academies that prepare professional officer personnel. At the same time, the scope of the training would be expanded: it would not only foster patriotic awareness but also include practical exercises to prepare for service in the Armed Forces, actions in emergencies, and living under temporary occupation.

The bill significantly expands the range of actors responsible for organizing the training. In addition to state and local authorities and educational institutions, the process would involve civil society, veterans’ organizations, and sports associations—groups not currently mentioned in the legislation.

The draft proposal creates a permanent infrastructure for adult training: Centers for the Preparation of Citizens for National Resistance. These Centers would serve as platforms for citizens of all ages to receive theoretical and practical instruction outside the formal education system. Training would include weapons handling, mine safety, first aid, and other essential skills. This instruction would complement the training offered in educational institutions. In addition to the Centers, special units for national resistance would be established within local executive bodies (such as the military and regional and district state administrations). These units would be responsible for coordinating the activities of the Centers and their training programs.

Establishing such Centers would not be mandatory, but local councils would have the authority to create them. Local governments would be responsible for approving the Centers’ regulations, appointing and dismissing their directors, and overseeing their operations. The Centers would be financed through local and state budgets and other sources such as international aid and charitable donations. According to the draft law’s authors, annual funding for 2025–2028 is projected to range from UAH 320 to 395 million.

The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine would play a leading role in the national resistance training system. It would develop training programs for the Centers, organize practical exercises, train instructors, and provide access to military training grounds and related infrastructure. The Ministry of Education and Science would be responsible for preparing students for national resistance, including developing curricula for educational institutions. The Ministry of Internal Affairs would regulate shooting ranges and oversee the use of weapons and ammunition during training activities.

In effect, the bill proposes a shift from a fragmented approach to a stable, systematic model for preparing the population for resistance. Instead of limiting training to school lessons or occasional assemblies, permanent Training Centers would be established. The process would see greater involvement from local authorities, educational institutions, and civil society organizations to reach as many citizens as possible. At the same time, the bill does not eliminate training for mobilized individuals; as before, they would continue to receive separate instruction at military training centers.

One more proposed change is eliminating the requirement for candidates seeking positions in the civil service, prosecutor’s office, or police to complete basic general military training—that is, the university-level course required to obtain the rank of reserve officer. Instead, actual prior military service would now be accepted as sufficient.

Clarifying rules for military contracts during martial law

Currently, when a service member transfers from one type of military service to another—for example, from conscripted service during mobilization to contract service or from contract service to the reserve—their existing contract is terminated, and a new one is signed. However, in cases where a transfer occurs between different military formations (such as from the Security Service of Ukraine to the Armed Forces of Ukraine), the law does not explicitly define how the contract functions during the transition. This results in legal uncertainty: when exactly does the previous contract end, is there a gap in service, and how should the formation change be formally documented?

Bill No. 13346 addresses legislative gaps that arose following a new procedure for transferring service members between different military formations. It defines how such transfers should be formalized to avoid breaks in service, preserve the legal status of service members, and ensure accurate personnel accounting.

Under the bill, a service member’s existing contract would remain in effect until they are officially removed from the personnel list of their previous formation. If the service member declines to sign a new contract upon arrival at the new formation, they would not return to their former unit. Instead, they would automatically continue serving in the new formation as a mobilized conscript during martial law.

Authorization for discharge from military service due to unlawful conscription

Bill No. 13345 proposes allowing the discharge of individuals from military service if a court finds that their conscription during mobilization was unlawful.

Currently, there are cases where individuals are conscripted in violation of established procedures—for example, those with valid legal grounds for deferment may still be mobilized. Even if a court rules that such conscription was illegal, the person remains in service because current legislation does not provide a legal basis for discharge. The bill seeks to resolve this issue by allowing individuals to be released from service following a court decision declaring their conscription unlawful.

Changes to the procedure for reserving individuals eligible for military service 

Currently, the law does not contain specific provisions for reserving employees subject to military service who do not have a military ID or are not registered with military authorities. It also does not regulate the procedures for concluding or terminating labor contracts in such cases.

Bill No. 13335 proposes introducing a temporary reservation period of up to 45 days for employees eligible for military service who work at critically important enterprises but do not have a properly issued military ID or are not registered for military duty. This reservation could be granted once per calendar year. The Cabinet of Ministers would determine the procedure for granting such reservations and the list of qualifying enterprises.

Under the bill, employees entering into an employment contract at a critically important enterprise would be limited to a maximum of 45 days of probationary period. During this period, hiring individuals who lack proper military registration documents would be legally permissible. If the bill is adopted, this would not be considered a violation of defense or mobilization laws. In addition, employers would be allowed to terminate employees eligible for military service during the probationary period if they fail to obtain a military ID or register with the military.

Introducing a new flexible procedure for paying fines for violations of military registration rules

Under current law, Ukraine’s Code of Administrative Offenses stipulates that a fine for violating military registration or mobilization laws is settled if the individual pays at least 50% of the amount within 10 days after the court ruling enters legal force. For instance, if someone is fined UAH 17,000 for violating registration requirements, paying UAH 8,500 within 10 days would be sufficient. If no payment is made, the full fine becomes subject to compulsory enforcement, regardless of the individual’s financial circumstances.

Bill No. 13350 proposes changing this approach by allowing individuals to pay a reduced portion of the fine depending on how quickly they make the payment: 10% if paid within 2 days, 20% within 4 days, 30% within 6 days, 40% within 8 days, or 50% within 10 days from the date the court ruling enters into legal force.

In addition, a fine could only be forcibly recovered if the individual has sufficient income or savings to pay it. In such cases, only the portion of funds exceeding the minimum wage (UAH 8,000) and the subsistence minimum (ranging from UAH 2,361 to UAH 3,196, depending on the dependent family member) could be subject to garnishment. If the fine cannot be collected within three months after the person becomes financially able to pay, they may be assigned community service to earn the necessary amount.

Adjusting the state budget’s special fund to finance defense needs

Bill No. 13319 proposes increasing revenues to the state budget’s special fund by UAH 21.9 billion, sourced from additional dividends paid by Naftogaz of Ukraine based on its 2024 financial performance. The bill does not alter the company’s dividend payment procedures or rates. Instead, it includes these anticipated revenues in the special fund, which would be allocated to the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine for the development, procurement, modernization, and repair of weapons, military equipment, and related infrastructure.

Bill No. 13322 proposes an additional increase of UAH 60.2 billion to the special fund, sourced from an advance withdrawal of no less than 95% of Energoatom’s net profit for 2025. This is a one-time measure to transfer a larger portion of profits to the state budget and does not change the general rules for tax payments. The funds raised would be allocated to defense needs. In addition, the Accounting Chamber would be required to conduct an unscheduled audit of Energoatom’s expenditures for 2023–2025.

Together, these two bills propose directing UAH 82 billion in additional revenues from state-owned enterprises into the special fund of the state budget, with all proceeds earmarked for defense needs. 

Allowing foreign nonprofits to engage in lobbying activities

Bill No. 13339 proposes granting foreign nonprofit organizations the right to engage in lobbying activities in Ukraine, provided such activities are permitted under their founding documents and operate through a representative office or subdivision within the country.

The draft law introduces the concept of a lobbying request—a formal appeal submitted by a lobbying entity to a government body seeking information, an official interpretation, or a position on matters related to lobbying. (The subject of lobbying is defined as a law or other official document that a lobbyist seeks to have adopted, amended, repealed, or retained.) In more complex cases, government authorities would be required to respond to such requests within five or 20 business days. The bill stipulates that refusal to respond to a lobbying request, or unlawful refusal to accept one, would entail liability as established by law. However, the bill does not specify the nature of that liability (e.g., disciplinary, administrative, or otherwise) or the sanctions that may apply. Therefore, practical enforcement of this provision would depend on whether additional legislative amendments are adopted.

The bill also proposes introducing a simplified procedure for granting lobbying entities access to government buildings to carry out lobbying activities. It recommends that the Cabinet of Ministers, executive authorities, and local governments develop mechanisms to facilitate such simplified access.

Changes to the declaration process, lifestyle monitoring, and liability for corruption offenses

Bill No. 13271, along with its alternative versions, seeks to significantly reduce liability for false asset declarations, effectively enabling dishonest officials to escape consequences.

The main bill, No. 13271, provides for the automatic population of asset declarations with data—such as salaries and income—retrieved from state registers for both the declarant and their family members. Any information automatically included in the declaration would be presumed accurate, and the declarant would not bear responsibility for potential errors in that data. If the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) fails to ensure automatic data loading for 2024, declarants would not be held liable for incomplete information in that year’s declaration.

The bill proposes prohibiting the NACP from conducting a second full audit of a previously reviewed declaration, unless there is a court conviction. Even in that case, a second audit could only occur within one year of the conviction entering legal force. Lifestyle monitoring would be limited to the period during which the individual held office (currently, declarations are audited regardless of when the assets were acquired) and to one year (down from the current three) after leaving office. Monitoring of family members would apply only while they are officially recognized as such. The bill would also require that the declarant be notified whenever their restricted-access data—such as ID numbers, property locations, or bank account numbers—is shared with third parties, including law enforcement or journalists.

The bill raises the threshold for criminal liability for false asset declarations to over UAH 3 million (1,000 subsistence minimums, up from the current 500). The threshold for administrative liability would also rise to 1,000 subsistence minimums (currently 500, or approximately UAH 1.5 million). In addition, the threshold for unlawful enrichment would increase from 6,000 to over 8,000 tax-free minimum incomes (approximately UAH 136,000). 

The alternative bill, No. 13271-1, introduces a rule that the NACP may audit only assets acquired during a person’s time in office and only those that are owned by the declarant or have been officially declared by them. Property registered to other individuals or acquired before or after the person’s time in office would not be subject to verification. Lifestyle monitoring would be limited to a maximum of four months. The threshold for criminal liability for false declarations would increase from the current 500–2,000 subsistence minimums (UAH 1.5–6 million) to 750–2,500 (UAH 2.3–7.6 million). The threshold for administrative liability would rise from 100–500 to 150–750 subsistence minimums. The threshold for unlawful enrichment would increase from UAH 100,000 (6,000 tax-free minimum incomes) to over UAH 8.3 million (2,750 subsistence minimums for non-disabled individuals). The bill also changes jurisdiction: the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) can investigate false declaration cases only if undeclared assets exceed 2,000 subsistence minimums. Lastly, the bill limits how long data can be stored in the Register of Corrupt Officials: one year for administrative and civil liability and until the conviction is expunged for criminal offenses. 

The second alternative bill, No. 13271-2, introduces a five-year limit on the retention of information in the Register of Corrupt Officials concerning legal entities subjected to criminal sanctions for corruption offenses. Currently, no retention period is defined, making this the first measure to establish a clear deadline after which such information must be removed from the register.

Clarifying criteria for holding judges accountable for delays in case proceedings

Current legislation provides for disciplinary liability of a judge for unjustified delays in reviewing an application, complaint, or case within the timeframes established by law or for failing to take the necessary actions to ensure timely consideration of a case. However, the law does not set clear criteria for objectively assessing such conduct. Bill No. 13316 proposes introducing a new rule: when evaluating a judge’s actions, the following factors would be taken into account—how promptly the judge scheduled the case for hearing, the length of breaks between court sessions, whether there were valid reasons for postponements or recesses, how well the case was prepared, what steps the judge took to remove obstacles to its consideration, how the judge organized the work of court staff, and whether they monitored the timeliness of responses from other authorities.

The introduction of these criteria is intended to unify the approach to evaluating judges’ actions in cases of delayed consideration of cases.

Additional fine tiers for speeding violations 

Ukraine’s Code of Administrative Offenses establishes only two levels of liability for speeding: exceeding the limit by more than 20 km/h results in a fine of UAH 340, while exceeding it by more than 50 km/h carries a fine of UAH 1,700. 

Bills No. 13314 and 13314-1 propose introducing a graduated system of fines based on how much the speed limit is exceeded. Both drafts set out a gradual increase ranging from UAH 340 to UAH 3,400, depending on the severity of the violation (from 20 km/h over the limit to more than 80 km/h). The main difference lies in the initial threshold: Bill No. 13314 proposes penalties starting at 10 km/h over the limit, while Bill No. 13314-1 retains the current 20 km/h threshold. In both cases, an additional sanction—suspension of the driver’s license—is foreseen if the violation causes a hazardous situation.

Both bills propose allowing authorities to hold the actual driver responsible for the offense rather than the registered owner, as is currently the case.

Using electronic identifiers to confirm disability parking rights

Currently, the law requires parking lot owners to reserve at least 10% of spaces for unrestricted use by drivers with disabilities or those transporting individuals with disabilities. To make use of this benefit, drivers may display a “Driver with Disability” sign on their vehicle and are required to carry physical documents confirming their disability status.

Bill No. 13321 proposes allowing drivers with disabilities—or those transporting persons with disabilities—to access these benefits only if a special identification sign is displayed on the vehicle and a unique electronic identifier (QR code) confirms disability status. The Cabinet of Ministers would determine the procedure for issuing the sign and QR code. Disability documents may be presented in electronic form.

Introducing new rules for state support of organic and artisanal product manufacturers and restrictions on trade practices

Bill No. 13312 proposes introducing the concept of an “artisanal food product” into legislation. This product is defined as one made in small quantities using traditional or manual methods and natural ingredients.

The bill introduces new forms of state support for organic and artisanal food product manufacturers, including organizing fairs and festivals and assisting in integrating their products into public procurement. For example, their goods could be used in school or hospital meal programs. The bill also proposes requiring retail chains and marketplaces to allocate at least 10% of their sales space for these products.

The bill also defines a “perishable food product” as one that must be consumed within 30 days of the production date. Special payment terms would apply to such products: retailers must pay suppliers no later than 10 days after the delivery is completed or the invoice is issued. Payment must be made for all other food products within 30 days. If the buyer delays payment by more than 10 days, the supplier would have the right to suspend deliveries or terminate the contract without penalty.

The bill proposes banning “unfair trade practices”—such as large retail chains forcing suppliers to cover advertising, storage, or losses related to damaged or spoiled goods already delivered to the buyer, unilaterally changing contract terms, imposing unjustified penalties, or demanding exclusivity. Retailers would also be prohibited from charging suppliers more than 10% of the delivered product’s value for additional trade services (such as advertising or marketing), and such services would only be allowed under a separate written agreement.

In addition, the bill proposes capping bank acquiring fees—that is, card transaction fees—on food product sales at 0.2% of the transaction amount.

Overall, the bill envisions a significantly greater degree of state intervention in business operations, which could result in higher prices and reduced availability of certain goods or services.