Anyone who has ever tried to buy a train ticket during peak season knows the feeling: tickets disappear within minutes of going on sale, only to “resurface” on shady websites at double the price. The fight against scalpers has long been a major headache for Ukrzaliznytsia. And now, it seems, a modern solution has been found: verification via “Diya.Sign.” The idea is simple and, at first glance, brilliant—when you buy a ticket online, you confirm your identity with an electronic signature, ensuring that each ticket goes to a single buyer.

Ukrzaliznytsia has decided to extend this mechanism—already tested on international routes—to the most popular domestic routes as well, completely halting ticket sales at ticket offices for these routes. Let’s try to figure out whether this brilliant digital innovation is turning into a trap for millions of Ukrainians and whether it’s creating more problems than it solves.

When an App Is More Important Than a Passport

Imagine this scenario: you’re a law-abiding citizen with a passport in your pocket, but you can’t buy a train ticket. Why? Because you don’t have a smartphone, or it’s too old for the “Dii” app, or you live in a rural area with unreliable internet, or you simply don’t trust digital apps and don’t want to install them. From Ukrzaliznytsia’s perspective, on certain trains you’re now a “second-class” passenger.

And this is where we encounter the first and most important legal issue. Buying a train ticket isn’t just a transaction. It’s the conclusion of a public contract. In simple terms, it’s like going to a store to buy bread. The store cannot refuse to sell you anything if you have the money. Similarly, “Ukrzaliznytsia,” as a carrier with a monopoly, is obligated to provide services to anyone who requests them. This is explicitly stated in Article 633 of the Civil Code of Ukraine.

By establishing “Diy” as the sole means of access to the service, the carrier is unilaterally changing the terms of service. It is not simply offering a convenient digital service but is forcing people to use it, thereby creating an artificial barrier. This creates a paradox: your passport, the primary document proving your identity, suddenly becomes less important than having the app on your phone. This is not just an inconvenience—it is a direct violation of the principle of equality.

The “Digital Divide” and the Right to Freedom of Movement

The Constitution of Ukraine guarantees everyone the right to freedom of movement. Of course, this right may be restricted, but only by law, not by an internal decision of a joint-stock company—even a state-owned one. When an elderly person who has bought tickets at the ticket window their entire life, or a soldier on leave who doesn’t want to bother installing apps, cannot travel home—that is precisely what restricting freedom of movement looks like in practice.

Ukrzaliznytsia’s initiative exacerbates the so-called “digital divide,” placing vast groups of people at a disadvantage. This applies to both older adults, who find it difficult to master new technologies, and low-income citizens who cannot afford a modern smartphone. Residents of rural areas and frontline territories find themselves in the same situation, where high-quality mobile internet is a luxury rather than the norm. Finally, this approach ignores the position of those who consciously limit their use of digital technologies for security or privacy reasons.

None of these people are speculators. They are ordinary passengers whom the state, through “Ukrzaliznytsia,” is effectively depriving of access to a basic service.

Behind the Scenes of Digital Convenience: Technical and Operational Risks

In our enthusiasm for digital transformation, we often forget its downside—technical fragility. A system with no alternatives, reliant on the complex interaction of several platforms (Ukrzaliznytsia, Diya, BankID, mobile operators), is inherently vulnerable. And when it fails—which is only a matter of time—the problems will be far more serious than a line at the ticket window.

First and foremost, critical dependence on a single infrastructure creates enormous risks: in the event of a massive DDoS attack on “Diya’s” servers or a technical failure in the “Ukrzaliznytsia” system, ticket sales for key routes will be completely paralyzed. Without ticket windows as an alternative, thousands of people will find themselves trapped at a critical moment, making the system potentially dangerous.

Added to this systemic vulnerability is the human factor, since “Dii” is inextricably linked to a smartphone. If a phone is lost, broken, or simply runs out of battery, a person loses their only means of accessing the service, turning a minor inconvenience into a serious problem.

Moreover, this initiative creates invisible barriers to the outside world. Foreign tourists or Ukrainians permanently residing abroad cannot use the system, which harms the country’s appeal to tourists and isolates its transportation system.

But the most complex issue remains the legal vacuum regarding liability. Who will be held liable if a passenger suffers financial losses due to a system failure? Current legislation does not provide a clear answer, leaving the consumer to deal with the problem alone, without any real means of seeking compensation for damages.

This set of technical and operational risks demonstrates that the hasty implementation of digital solutions with no alternatives can lead to a collapse where there was previously merely an inconvenience.

What are the chances of success in court, and what will the Antimonopoly Committee say?

What should a citizen do if they’re denied the opportunity to buy a ticket? Take the matter to court. And the prospects for such lawsuits are very strong. The arguments for court are rock-solid: violation of consumer rights, coercion into entering into a contract under discriminatory terms, and violation of constitutional rights. The court will most likely rule in the individual’s favor and order the carrier to remove the obstacles.

But there is another powerful player whose word could be decisive—the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (AMCU). “Ukrzaliznytsia” is a monopoly. And abuse of a monopoly position falls directly within the AMCU’s jurisdiction. Creating conditions under which one group of consumers (those with “Diya”) has access to the service, while another (those without “Diya”) does not, is a classic example of such abuse.

The AMCU’s response could be severe: ranging from mandatory recommendations to change the rules to a multi-million fine. After all, the Committee’s mission is to protect competition and consumer interests from the dictates of monopolists.

The Path to Balance: Innovation for All

Undoubtedly, digitalization is a driver of progress, and combating abuses in the ticket market is a critical task. The use of modern tools, such as “Diya.Sign,” is a step in the right direction. At the same time, when implementing any innovations in the social sphere, it is important to keep in mind a key principle: inclusivity and choice.

“Diya.Signature” can be an excellent verification tool and a convenient, modern option for many passengers. However, for technology to truly serve people, it is important that it does not become the only option with no alternatives. Maintaining the option to purchase a ticket the traditional way—for example, at a ticket window using a passport—will help avoid creating barriers for various groups of citizens.

In this way, the noble goal of combating ticket scalpers will be achieved without the risk of social exclusion. After all, the ultimate goal of any government innovation is to improve the lives of all citizens, not just the technologically savvy segment of the population. It is precisely this balanced approach that is in keeping with the spirit of a modern European state.