ZMINA at the #IBelong forum: challenges on citizenship during the war

On December 12-13, 2024, Kyiv hosted the forum “Citizenship and Statelessness in Ukraine: Wartime and Post-War Challenges”, dedicated to the 10th anniversary of the global #IBelong campaign. The forum was organised by the CF Right to Protection with the support of UNHCR and the Educational and Scientific Institute of International Relations of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. The event was aimed at raising awareness of the public and authorities about the challenges related to citizenship, in particular the issues of stateless persons and those at risk of statelessness.

Photo: CF Right to Protection

The forum brought together representatives of state authorities, international and national organisations, academics, students and stateless persons. Human Rights Centre ZMINA was represented at the event by Advocacy Manager Alena Lunova, who participated in two key panel discussions:

• “The Institution of Citizenship in Ukraine During the War: Leave It Alone or Act Now?”;
• “Termination of Ukrainian Citizenship and Revocation of Decisions on Citizenship”.

During the discussions, the participants debated topical issues related to the impact of the war on the institution of citizenship in Ukraine and the need for its reform. 

Alena Lunova stressed that any changes to the institution of citizenship should take into account the need to overcome the consequences of the war and take into account the interests of people who remain in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine.  

“Any amendments to the legislation of Ukraine concerning citizenship must take into account the need to overcome the consequences of the war, on the one hand, and on the other hand, they cannot be reckless steps aimed at putting Ukrainians who have left the occupation or who continue to remain in the occupation at risk of being deprived of or losing their Ukrainian citizenship“, said Alena Lunova.

Photo: CF Right to Protection

She noted that the RF is pursuing a deliberate policy of forced passportisation of Ukrainians so that as many Ukrainian citizens as possible receive Russian passports. By restricting access to medical care, social benefits, pensions, restrictions on property rights and even freedom of movement, the aggressor country is putting pressure on Ukrainian citizens who remain under occupation to impose its own citizenship on them. Ukraine should take into account such deliberate criminal actions of the RF. 

Photo: CF Right to Protection

The Law of Ukraine “On Ensuring the Rights and Freedoms of Citizens and the Legal Regime in the Temporarily Occupied Territory of Ukraine” explicitly states that the forced automatic acquisition of Russian citizenship by Ukrainian citizens in the occupied territories is not recognised by Ukraine and is not a ground for losing Ukrainian citizenship. However, the law does not define what constitutes automatic forced acquisition of Russian citizenship. 

“In fact, the crime of imposing Russian citizenship is being committed in the occupied territories, but acquiring citizenship is not automatic. People are being subjected to such difficult conditions that they cannot live in the territory of Ukraine occupied by the RF without a Russian passport. And they are forced to write a statement or even record a video with the so-called oath of a Russian citizen when applying for an occupier’s passport. These practices of the aggressor country should be taken into account when drafting amendments to the legislation on Ukrainian citizenship in order to avoid creating additional traps. Currently, two draft laws have been registered in the Verkhovna Rada that provide for the possibility of losing Ukrainian citizenship through the voluntary acquisition of a passport of the aggressor country. This provision poses significant risks to Ukrainian citizens“, summed up the advocacy manager of Human Rights Centre ZMINA.

This material has been funded by UK International Development from the Government of the United Kingdom; the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the official position of the UK Government.