Ombudsman goes to Constitutional Court: will the moratorium on enforcement of decisions concerning military structures be lifted?
8 January 18:53
The Verkhovna Rada’s Human Rights Commissioner, Dmytro Lubinets, has appealed to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine to review the constitutionality of a provision in the Law on Enforcement Proceedings, which effectively blocks the enforcement of court decisions during martial law in relation to military bodies and defense industry enterprises, reports "Komersant Ukrainian".
This provision suspends enforcement actions in cases where the debtors are, in particular, military authorities, military units, military educational institutions, and defense industry enterprises.
What is the essence of the problem?
According to the ombudsman, the moratorium makes it impossible to enforce non-property-related court decisions, i.e., those that oblige state bodies to take certain actions.
According to Lubinets, such decisions are critically important in a state of martial law, as their postponement effectively deprives people of their right to judicial protection.
Which decisions are not being enforced
The constitutional submission provides examples of court decisions whose enforcement is being blocked:
- the obligation of the TCC and the SP to make changes to the Unified State Register of Conscripts, Military Personnel, and Reservists (in particular, regarding exclusion from military registration);
- the obligation of military units to consider a soldier’s report or make a decision on dismissal from military service.
Separate emphasis is placed on the blocking of decisions that must be enforced immediately — for example, on reinstatement to a position in the public service or at work after unlawful dismissal.
Why this is unconstitutional, according to the ombudsman
Dmytro Lubinets believes that the moratorium:
- violates the right to judicial protection (Article 55 of the Constitution);
- indirectly restricts the right to work and receive wages;
- turns judicial protection against unlawful dismissal into a formality.
The submission states that the contested provision contradicts several articles of the Constitution, in particular the principle of the rule of law and the binding nature of court decisions, and creates a situation of ongoing human rights violations.
On December 30, 2025, the constitutional submission was assigned to the reporting judge. The decision of the Constitutional Court will determine whether the moratorium will remain in force in its current form or whether it will be declared unconstitutional.
