Civil society activists are asking members of parliament not to vote for the new Civil Code

Dozens of organizations spoke out against the adoption of this document in a statement, including "Dzerkalo Tyzhnia," the civic organization "Institute of Mass Media", “Detector Media,” the civic initiative “Holka,” the ZMINA Human Rights Center, “Ecology – Law – Human,” the “Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group,” WWF-Ukraine, “Teren,” and other organizations.

One of the signatories’ key arguments is the risk of losing legal continuity. The current Civil Code has been in effect for over 22 years, and during this time, the courts have established a body of case law that citizens, businesses, and the state rely on.

Activists believe that completely replacing the code would nullify the application of some established legal precedents and could create legal uncertainty.

The authors of the statement warn that, if adopted, the draft law would also pose risks to the protection of state, municipal, and private property; freedom of speech; the right to privacy; as well as the rights of women, children, and LGBTIQ+ people.

At the same time, the signatories support the modernization of civil legislation and its alignment with European standards through amendments to the current Civil Code. They emphasize that such changes require proper public discussion and an assessment of potential consequences.

We risk not only changing the rules but also undermining decades of judicial work. Over more than 22 years, the Supreme Court has developed valuable case law that helps the state and communities recover unlawfully alienated property. But the new Civil Code may pose the greatest risks to public property – in particular, assets subject to restrictions on transfer, property necessary for the state to perform its core functions and ensure national defense capabilities, property belonging to the Ukrainian people, and land removed from civil circulation… “The Civil Code isn’t perfect, but it can be improved through targeted amendments rather than being replaced by an entirely new document,” explains Iryna Fedoriv, head of the civic initiative “Holka,” as she outlines why the adoption of the new law could be a disaster.

The document also poses risks not only to property protection but also to human rights and freedom of speech. These include the “right to be forgotten,” which will lead to demands for the removal of archival materials. It also restricts the publication of correspondence between legal entities that is of public interest. Furthermore, it establishes an overly broad “right of reply,” even when the published information is accurate, and so on. Media professionals have already emphasized that, in its current form, the Civil Code will significantly restrict the public’s right to know and, consequently, to hold the government and public figures accountable. Instead, it will provide more opportunities for abuse of power. This is unacceptable for a country that has defended democracy at such a high cost,” emphasizes the editor-in-chief of the “Detector Media” publishing group.

For citizens, the elimination of judicial precedent could mean longer court proceedings, additional costs, and less predictable decisions by the judicial system. For businesses, it means increased legal uncertainty, and for the state, it places an additional burden on the judicial system.

Civil society organizations and media outlets that support this position can join the statement by filling out the form.

As a reminder, street protests broke out in Ukraine in the spring of 2026 following the adoption of the Civil Code in the first reading. Within a few hours, citizens collected over 29,000 signatures on a petition addressed to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, demanding that he veto the bill should it be adopted.

The document, which is over 800 pages long and was spearheaded in part by Ruslan Stefanchuk, Speaker of Parliament, has faced harsh criticism from the media community, human rights activists, and civil society organizations due to a number of controversial provisions.

Members of Parliament submitted more than 15,000 amendments to the legislative initiative, which is a record high in the entire history of this convocation of parliament.