The Verkhovna Rada has passed a law on multiple citizenship: an opportunity for the diaspora and a challenge for the constitutional system.

On June 18, 2025, the Verkhovna Rada passed Bill No. 11469 on multiple citizenship in its entirety. What this means is explained in the analysis below.

This initiative could fundamentally change the approach to citizenship in Ukraine and is of strategic importance, especially for the millions of Ukrainians who have received temporary protection abroad due to the full-scale invasion. Let’s take a closer look at what exactly is being proposed, what problems it addresses, and what debates are taking place around this sensitive topic.

“Single Citizenship”: How Does It Work (or Not Work) Right Now?

Article 4 of the Constitution of Ukraine clearly enshrines the principle of single citizenship. Based on this, the Law “On Citizenship of Ukraine” stipulates that a citizen of Ukraine’s voluntary acquisition of citizenship of another state constitutes grounds for the loss of Ukrainian citizenship.

It sounds straightforward, but in practice, the mechanism does not work. First, the procedure is not automatic. Loss of citizenship does not occur the moment another passport is obtained but requires a complex process that is finalized by a decree of the President of Ukraine. Such decrees are issued rarely and are not widespread. Second, the state lacks effective tools to track whether its citizens have obtained another passport. Third, this creates a legal conflict: millions of Ukrainians de facto hold passports from other countries, living in a “gray zone” and technically violating the law.

The full-scale war has brought this problem to a head. Ukrainians fleeing the war to EU countries, Canada, or the United States may eventually become eligible for citizenship in those countries. This presents a painful choice: to integrate into a new society by obtaining its passport, but risk losing their legal ties to their homeland, or to forgo new opportunities in order to retain Ukrainian citizenship.

What does Bill No. 11469 propose? Key changes

The presidential initiative proposes not “dual citizenship” in its traditional sense, but rather the introduction of the institution of multiple citizenship. This is a more flexible approach that legalizes the possession by a Ukrainian citizen of passports from other countries, but subject to certain conditions and restrictions.

The key changes can be outlined in several main areas. First, transparency is proposed instead of bans and penalties: Ukrainian citizens will be required to declare their citizenship in another country, which will allow the state to understand which of its citizens hold such status. Second, acquiring citizenship will be possible only for countries included in the list of “friendly” nations. This primarily refers to European Union countries, the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Japan, and other states that do not pursue an aggressive policy toward Ukraine. Third, there will be a strict ban on acquiring citizenship of an aggressor state (the Russian Federation), which will be considered grounds for the compulsory loss of Ukrainian citizenship. Furthermore, even if they hold a passport from a “friendly” country, citizens with multiple citizenships will not be able to hold positions related to the exercise of state functions (such as serving as judges, members of parliament, or ministers) until they renounce their foreign citizenship. Finally, the bill also simplifies the procedure for obtaining Ukrainian citizenship for foreigners who defended Ukraine and for members of the diaspora, without requiring them to renounce their first passport.

Why is this strategically important for Ukraine and its refugees?

The adoption of this law is a step aimed at addressing several strategic objectives. First and foremost, it is about preserving the nation. Legalizing multiple citizenship will allow millions of Ukrainians who have emigrated to obtain legal status in their host countries without severing their ties to Ukraine.

Another important aspect is legal certainty. Ukrainians abroad will gain the assurance that their Ukrainian passport and all the rights associated with it remain intact. This also pertains to demographic and economic potential. Instead of losing millions of people, Ukraine gains the opportunity to have them participate in its economic life. Finally, this sends a powerful message to the Ukrainian diaspora around the world: “You are part of us; we need you,” which will help counteract assimilation.

“Pitfalls” and Fundamental Risks of the Reform

Despite the obvious advantages, the initiative contains a number of fundamental legal risks and contradictions that are causing serious concern among experts.

The key problem is potential unconstitutionality. The bill proposes to use an ordinary law to change the approach to an issue governed by Article 4 of the Constitution. Article 4 of the Constitution of Ukraine is concise but ambiguous: “There is a single citizenship in Ukraine.”

For decades, there have been two fundamentally different approaches to interpreting this provision in Ukraine. The first is a strict interpretation: “Single citizenship” means a complete and unconditional prohibition on a citizen of Ukraine holding a passport from any other country. In other words, if you are Ukrainian, you cannot simultaneously be a citizen of, for example, Poland or Canada. The law still in effect is based precisely on this interpretation.

The second approach is a liberal (historical) interpretation: This provision has historical roots. It was introduced to prevent federalization and separatism. In other words, “single citizenship” means that in Ukraine there cannot be “citizenship of the Lviv Oblast” or “citizenship of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.” It is aimed at ensuring the unity of the state, not at prohibiting the possession of a passport from another sovereign country.

Instead of initiating the complex procedure of amending Article 4 of the Constitution (which requires 300+ votes and time), the authors of the bill took a different approach. They are essentially proposing to use an ordinary law (which requires 226 votes to pass) to establish that the second, more liberal interpretation is the correct one. In other words, the law states: “We believe that the Constitution does not prohibit holding a passport from another country, so we allow it, but with certain rules.”

This could be a legally flawed approach. First, a law cannot interpret the Constitution, which has higher legal authority. Laws must conform to the Constitution, not the other way around. Only one body—the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU)—has the authority to officially interpret the Constitution.

Furthermore, there is a risk of repeal. If the law is adopted in its current form, any group of members of parliament or the President himself could file a petition with the CCU challenging its constitutionality. And if the CCU sides with the first, strict interpretation of Article 4, the entire law on multiple citizenship will be declared unconstitutional and repealed.

Thus, the legislature is basing the entire reform on the assumption that its interpretation of the Constitution is correct, without having an official opinion from the Constitutional Court. This creates a fundamental risk that this entire complex and important system could be dismantled by a single future decision of the Court, which would lead to legal chaos.

Second, this poses a threat to Ukrainians in the occupied territories. The bill proposes stripping citizenship for the “voluntary” acquisition of a passport from the aggressor state. However, the concept of “voluntariness” under occupation is a fiction. A Russian passport is often a prerequisite for survival, access to medical care, employment, and basic safety. A literal application of this provision could lead to the mass loss of citizenship among hundreds of thousands of victims of the occupation—people whom the state, on the contrary, is striving to reintegrate. This creates the risk of a new category of stateless persons (apatrides) emerging and provides a powerful trump card for Russian propaganda.

Third, there is a risk of creating “second-class citizens.” Restrictions on dual nationals holding public office or working in law enforcement agencies or the SBU directly contradict Article 24 of the Constitution, which guarantees the equality of all citizens in their rights. Instead of uniting the nation, such a provision could institutionalize a hierarchy among citizens: “full” citizens with a single passport and “second-class” citizens with multiple passports. This is a dangerous precedent that undermines the foundations of the democratic system.

Fourth, questions arise regarding the rule of law. The bill contains neither a list of “friendly” countries nor clear criteria for compiling such a list. Instead, it proposes that this list be determined by a subordinate act of the Cabinet of Ministers. This means that a fundamental human right—citizenship—is made contingent on an administrative decision that can change depending on the political climate. This undermines the principle of legal certainty, as a person’s status could change not through a change in the law, but through a simple government decision.

Finally, questions regarding national security remain unresolved, as noted by the Verkhovna Rada’s Main Scientific and Expert Directorate. What about military service, taxation, and loyalty in the event of a conflict of interest between countries of citizenship? The bill states that a foreign passport does not exempt a person from obligations to Ukraine, but the detailed mechanisms for enforcing these obligations remain unregulated.

The Law Became a Reality: A Brief Summary of the Vote 

As of June 2025, Bill No. 11469 has passed its first reading in the Verkhovna Rada. The relevant committee on human rights has already completed its work on amendments and recommended that parliament adopt the law in the second reading and as a whole. This means the bill is fully ready for the final vote.

Bill No. 11469 is a pragmatic response to the challenges posed by war and globalization. For millions of Ukrainians abroad, it offers a chance to avoid the agonizing choice between their future and their roots. For Ukraine, it is an investment in preserving its most valuable asset—its people. The success of this reform will depend on whether lawmakers can strike a delicate balance between necessary liberalization and unconditional adherence to constitutional principles and national security requirements.

On June 18, 2025, the Verkhovna Rada adopted Bill No. 11469 on the introduction of multiple citizenship in its entirety. 243 members of parliament voted in favor, 19 voted against, nine abstained, and 34 did not vote at all.