Bill No. 13673, which proposes to increase penalties for illegally crossing the state border, currently lacks practical mechanisms for implementation, according to Serhiy Derevianko, an attorney with the Barristers law firm.

“The bill is poorly drafted, in particular, it is unclear how, for example, individuals who left the temporarily occupied territories to go outside Ukraine and cannot return to their country for various reasons—such as serious illness or caring for a disabled close relative—should proceed. According to the bill, such individuals must return to Ukraine either before the law enters into force or within three months thereafter; otherwise they will face criminal liability, which, of course, violates the rights of such individuals,” he told the Interfax-Ukraine news agency.

Derevianko also noted that “it is unclear what to do about those people who, perhaps without the necessary documents, left Ukraine at the start of the war for certain reasons and subsequently did not and do not have the opportunity to return to Ukraine in the near future.”

“This raises a number of questions, in particular, how and to whom these people, while abroad, are supposed to explain their circumstances, given that the amendments to the Criminal Code regarding the illegal crossing of the state border provide for exemption from criminal liability only on the condition that the individuals, having been outside the country for three months from the moment of crossing the state border, have returned to Ukrainian territory and, prior to being notified of their status as suspects in this criminal offense, voluntarily reported what happened to a law enforcement agency,” he said.

He noted that the bill proposes to increase penalties for the illegal smuggling of persons across Ukraine’s state border during a state of war or a state of emergency.

“The purpose of the bill is to prevent evasion of military conscription during mobilization by ‘fleeing’ abroad, and to provide those subject to military service with the opportunity to return to Ukraine. If the bill is adopted, after three months have elapsed, persons of draft age who illegally crossed the state border while martial law was in effect and did not return from abroad will face criminal liability,” he said.

Commenting on what the bill refers to as the “legally established period of stay outside Ukraine under a state of emergency,” Derevianko explained that “current legislation does not provide a clear definition, but the periods during which certain categories of citizens may remain outside Ukraine under martial law and a state of emergency are defined by Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 57 of January 27, 1995.”

“For example, in accordance with the aforementioned resolution, athletes who are members of Ukraine’s national teams may remain abroad continuously for no more than 30 calendar days from the date of crossing the state border, but for no less than the duration of the event specified in the Unified Calendar Plan of Physical Culture, Health, and Sports Events and Competitions of Ukraine for the relevant year,” he said.

“It turns out that, as of today, there are no mechanisms in place to implement the bill,” the lawyer concluded.