UKRAINE: The UN scrutinizes religious freedom in occupied and sovereign Ukraine
Implementation of Freedom of Conscience and Religious Freedoms in Ukraine under Martial Law: International Standards, UN Findings, and National Law Enforcement Practice
HRWF (15.12.2025) – On 9 December 2025, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) published the Report on the Human Rights Situation in Ukraine covering 1 June – 30 November 2025. One of the report’s central concerns was the exercise of freedom of religion and belief during armed conflict.
Freedom of Religion and Belief in Russian-Controlled Territories
OHCHR noted that the imposition of Russian legislation has significantly restricted the freedom to manifest religion or belief in occupied areas. Examples include:
- Under the Russian Code of Administrative Offenses, five individuals (three men and two women) and two organizations were fined for “illegal missionary activity,” including conducting worship services at home and failing to comply with marking requirements for religious buildings and literature.
- In June, an evangelical woman in the Donetsk region was fined 10,000 roubles (approximately $125) for organizing a praise group in a private home. Confiscated Bibles and hymnbooks were ordered destroyed because they lacked the required markings.
- In October, four Crimean Tatar women were charged with involvement in a terrorist organization based on alleged membership in Hizb ut-Tahrir, banned under Russian law but legal under Ukrainian law. All four women’s husbands were already imprisoned on related charges. The court ordered pretrial detention for two months, leaving one woman’s five children without parental care.
This marks the first known instance of Crimean Tatar women being charged under such allegations, according to OHCHR.
Freedom of Religion and Belief in Ukrainian-Controlled Territories
OHCHR repeatedly raised concerns regarding amendments to Ukrainian legislation affecting religious organizations. These amendments invoke “national security” as grounds for restricting freedom of religion, although neither the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) nor the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) recognize national security as a valid justification for such restrictions.
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) Case
On 8 July 2025, the State Service of Ukraine on Ethnic Policy and Freedom of Conscience conducted a review of the Kyiv Metropolis of the UOC. The findings indicated affiliation with the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), a prohibited organization under Ukrainian law.
Consequently:
- The State Service ordered the Kyiv Metropolis to formally sever ties with the ROC within 30 days.
- The UOC did not comply.
- After the deadline, the State Service petitioned the court to dissolve the Kyiv Metropolis and seize its property.
As of 11 December 2025, the case remains under review.
OHCHR recommended Ukraine revise the law “On the Protection of the Constitutional Order in the Sphere of Activities of Religious Organizations” to ensure full compliance with International Human Rights Law.
Conscientious Objection to Military Service
OHCHR also highlighted ongoing criminal prosecutions of individuals refusing mobilization for religious or conscientious reasons.
During the reporting period (1 June – 30 November 2025), OHCHR noted that on 27 October 2025, the Supreme Court of Ukraine upheld the previous conviction of a Jehovah’s Witness who had attempted to conscientiously refuse compulsory military service. The Court maintained that the European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence was not unconditionally applicable in the context of Ukraine’s large-scale war. The defendant had been sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for evading service but was released on probation.
OHCHR noted that under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the right of conscientious objection to military service allows no restrictions or derogation. (*)
Constitutional Challenges in Ukraine
The issue of the possibility in Ukraine during martial law to exercise the right to conscientious objection to military service with its replacement by alternative non-military service is the subject of ongoing discussions.
Although, according to Article 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine, “if the performance of military duty contradicts the religious beliefs of a citizen, the fulfillment of this duty must be replaced by alternative(non-military) service”, the special Law of Ukraine “On Alternative Non-Military Service” does not provide for the possibility of its passage under martial law.
The legal impossibility of undertaking alternative non-military service during martial law has been challenged through constitutional complaints:
- Dmytro Zelinsky — Constitutional proceedings were opened 24 September 2024
- Vitaliy Alekseenko — Constitutional proceedings were opened 6 May 2025
- Serhiy Ivanyushchenko — Constitutional proceedings were opened 15 July 2025
From July to October 2025, the Second Senate of the Constitutional Court consolidated these complaints into a single proceeding. Petitioners argue that the Law on Alternative (Non-Military) Service effectively prevents the exercise of the constitutional right under Article 35 of the Constitution, which guarantees replacement of military service for those whose religious beliefs prohibit it, because the law only provides substitution for conscription service, which currently does not exist.
As of December 2025, the case has been pending for over 14 months, despite the statutory six-month limit. Should the Constitutional Court find the relevant provisions unconstitutional:
- they would be invalidated, requiring Ukrainian authorities to establish procedures for alternative service even during martial law.
OHCHR Recommendations
OHCHR urges Ukraine to:
- Effectively recognize the right to conscientious objection in domestic law,
- Ensure that legislation fully aligns with Article 18 of the ICCPR, guaranteeing the full scope of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.
(*) HRWF Comment
According to Jehovah’s Witnesses sources and the Union of Orthodox Journalists, more than a thousand cases had been initiated against Jehovah’s Witnesses for refusing mobilization.
Photo: Orthodox Cathedral of Odesa partly destroyed by Russian shelling
