Ukraine’s civil society organisations and media organisations are calling on the Verkhovna Rada not to adopt new Civil Code (draft bill No. 15150) in second reading or as a whole, as per a joint statement by NGOs and the media, which the Institute of Mass Information has endorsed.
In their view, the proposed changes could create risks for freedom of expression, human rights, and the protection of property, while a complete replacement of the Code could lead to years of legal uncertainty and contradictions in case law.
In the joint statement, the signatories stressed that the draft bill needed an independent legal review and broad public discussion.
The reservations include possible restrictions on journalistic investigations, risks to the rights of women, children, and LGBTIQ+ people, as well as weaker protection for state-owned and communal property, including nature reserves and cultural heritage sites.
“Media and human rights organisations warned of threats to freedom of expression in the new Civil Code as early as June 2026. These included potential court bans on releasing pieces of reporting, an excessive expansion of the right to respond, the risks of the “right to obscurity” being exploited to hide information of public interest, and increased judicial pressure on journalists. These provisions risk chilling journalistic investigations and obstructing access to socially important information. European experts have also pointed out the need for additional freedom of expression safeguards,” the statement reads.
The authors of the statement also pointed out the potential impact of completely replacing the current Code, which has been in effect for over 22 years. According to them, changing the legal regulation could call into question part of the established case law and mean longer and more expensive proceedings for citizens and business. The statement also cites the Supreme Court’s warnings regarding the time it takes to build settled practice in applying new clauses.
The signatories acknowledged the need to modernise Ukraine’s civil law, but proposed making the changes gradually, through separate draft bills or coordinated packages of amendments to the current code. They called for an independent legal review of the potential impact of the changes on human rights, the judicial system, and Ukraine’s EU integration obligations.
READ MORE
- Verkhvona Rada adopts new Civil Code draft as basis: key changes, risks for media
- The new draft Civil Code. 11 ways to silence journalism
- Over 80 organisations urge Stefanchuk to rethink draft Civil Code
The Institute of Mass Information shares the full statement
New Civil Code may result in years of legal uncertainty
Statement by civil society and media organisations
We, representatives of civil society organisations and media organisations, call on the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine not to adopt the new Civil Code (draft bill No. 15150), initiated by Verkhovna Rada Chair Ruslan Stefanchuk et al.
We agree that Ukraine’s civil law needs to be modernised and brought closer to alignment with European standards. However, sweeping legal reform cannot be carried out in haste, without proper public discussion or assessment of its implications for human rights, the judicial system, the state, and communities.
Draft bill No. 15150 has already revealed problems that can not be written off as shortcomings in the wording of individual clauses.
Civil society and expert organisations have warned of risks it may pose to freedom of expression, the right to privacy, the rights of women, children, and LGBTIQ+ people, as well as the protection of state-owned, communal, and private property. Several provisions may create additional opportunities for abuse of rights and make it harder to recover unlawfully alienated property, and may lead to a spike in takeover schemes targeting state-owned and private property belonging to Ukraine’s citizens.
Media and human rights organisations warned of threats to freedom of expression in the new Civil Code as early as June 2026. These included potential court bans on releasing pieces of reporting, an excessive expansion of the right to respond, the risks of the “right to obscurity” being exploited to hide information of public interest, and increased judicial pressure on journalists. These provisions risk chilling journalistic investigations and obstructing access to socially important information. European experts have also pointed out the need for additional freedom of expression safeguards.
Particular concerns have arisen in regards to Book Nine of the draft bill, the provisions of which, according to experts and civic sector representatives, may undermine the mechanisms for protecting public property, such as land plots, forests, shorelines, nature reserves, and cultural heritage sites. This suggests an unwillingness to join the EU, since it constitutes a gross violation of EU law and will become a significant obstacle to the proper fulfilment of Chapter 27 requirements by Ukraine.
The scale of rejection of the draft bill by the public was also evidenced by a petition to the President of Ukraine demanding to veto its adoption, which gathered the required 25,000 signatures in less than a day and was supported by 29,000 citizens in total.
The problem, however, lies not only in the content of individual articles, but also in the way parliament is proposing to change the foundation of Ukraine’s private law.
The current Civil Code has been in use for more than 22 years. During that time, the courts have built up a substantial body of case law on which citizens, businesses, lawyers, and state bodies rely. This case law ensures the predictability of legal relations and helps people understand how the law protects their rights.
The Supreme Court has stressed that one of the fundamental principles of civil law is the stability of civil turnover. The current code has already proven its capacity for evolving: thanks to case law, the principles of good faith, the prohibition of contradictory behaviour, and the interpretation of contracts in favour of their validity are all active within it. By contrast, the initiators of the new versions have failed to show why the objectives of the overhaul could not be achieved by introducing amendments to the current Civil Code and why a complete replacement was necessary, under martial law at that.
The academic community of environmental law specialists has also repeatedly voiced its stance on the risks contained in the draft Civil Code in terms of its non-compliance with generally accepted provisions of international, national, and EU law on environmental protection (use of water, bioresources, observance of environmental safety). This is evidenced by numerous lawyers’ opinions, academic panels, professional discussions, and so on.
A complete replacement of the Civil Code and a substantial change to the structure of legal regulation may call into question the applicability of some established legal conclusions, give rise to new contradictions in case law, and lead to dispute resolution taking longer.
The Supreme Court has also stressed these risks, warning that establishing a settled practice in applying the contested innovations may take years.
For citizens, this means a risk of longer court proceedings, extra financial losses, and less predictable rulings. For business, it means growing legal uncertainty. For the state, it means a risk of overloading the judicial system and undermining trust in justice.
The modernisation of the law should not be achieved at the cost of losing legal certainty.
It is especially dangerous to create such risks during a full-scale war, when Ukrainian society, the economy, and the judicial system are already under extraordinary strain.
At the same time, we are convinced that the current civil legislation does call for some amendments. In particular, the provisions of Law No. 4292-IX, known as the “Ihor Mazepa law”, on protecting the rights of a bona fide acquirer need to be reviewed, as they have raised serious concerns over the risks of making it harder to recover unlawfully alienated public property.
However, the necessary changes can and must be made consistently, by preparing separate draft bills or intercoordinated amendment packages to the current Civil Code, with the involvement of judges, lawyers, academics, civil society organisations, and other stakeholders.
We call on the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine to:
1. Not allow the adoption of draft Civil Code No. 15150 in second reading or as a whole, and to stop its further promotion in the proposed format.
2. Carry out a full, independent legal review of the necessary changes, in particular their impact on fundamental human rights, case law, legal certainty, and Ukraine’s obligations within the framework of EU integration.
3. Begin an open, phased process of modernising civil legislation that preserves legal continuity, includes appropriate transitional provisions, and draws broadly on the expert and civic communities.
Ukraine needs a modern European civil law. But the number of new articles or the scale of the rewriting is not what makes legislation modern. Istead, it is the legislation’s effectiveness in protecting human rights, ensuring justice, and making legal relations predictable.
Human rights initiative Holka
Institute of Mass Information
Detector Media
Dzerkalo Tyzhnia
ZMINA Human Rights Centre
Media Initiative for Human Rights
Pylyp Orlyk Institute of Democracy
NGO ProMedia
NGO Ukrainian Institute of the Media and Communications
Natalia Sokolenko, journalist
NGO Gay Alliance Ukraine
ICO Environment — People — Law (EPL)
NGO National Ecology League
NGO Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group
NGO Teren
ANTS — National Interests Advocacy Network
NGO Interregional Centre for Research and Expertise
Greenpeace Ukraine
Pohlyad
NGO Guardians
NGO Anti-Corruption Dimension
NGO Save the Dnipro
NGO Ecopark Osokorky
NGO Ecosphere
NGO Civis Fortis
NGO Centre of Economic and Legal Analysis
NGO Grassroots Institute Ukraine
NGO Ecoltava
NGO Plateau
NGO Danube–Carpathian Program
NGO KHATS
NGO Levandivka – Bilohorshcha Ecospace
Kharkiv Women’s Association Sfera
NGO Ecocrew
NGO Asymmetry
NGO FRESH BLOOD
NGO Culture Action
NGO Kyiv Centre for Environment and Culture
NGO SVAROZHYCHI
NGO Gender Culture Centre
NGO Public Oversight. Openness. Transparency. Accountability
NGO I.DE.YA
Free Svydovets Initiative
Dnipro.media
NGO SPEKTR KHARKIV
NGO KYIVPRIDE
