Over 400 Ukrainian civil society organisations have signed a statement declaring that democratic elections cannot be held without the establishment of a lasting peace. This initiative, launched by Civil Network OPORA, an organisation with years of experience monitoring the integrity and legality of election processes in Ukraine, highlights this critical stance.
The signatories emphasise that it is Russia’s unprovoked aggression against Ukraine that makes holding presidential and parliamentary elections impossible. They also highlight that simply holding elections doesn’t guarantee they will be democratic.
For elections to be free and fair, there needs to be functioning electoral institutions, equal access to voting, security guarantees, and careful planning, all of which must be in place well before martial law ends.
“Without a doubt, elections in Ukraine must take place, but only after the war has ended and lasting peace is established — when conditions are created to hold them in a free, fair, democratic, and accessible manner,” the statement reads.
The majority of Ukrainian citizens also oppose the idea of elections during the war. This is reflected in surveys regularly conducted in Ukraine. For instance, according to a survey conducted in September-October 2024 by the sociological group “Rating” on behalf of the Centre for Analysis and Sociological Research (CISR) of the International Republican Institute (IRI), 60% of Ukrainians did not support the idea of holding presidential elections during the war. By February 2025, this figure had slightly increased, with 63% of Ukrainians opposing any elections until the war is over, according to a survey by the sociological centre “Sotsis”. Additionally, more than half (57%) of Ukrainians trust President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Together with Civil Network OPORA, we explain why elections cannot take place during the war and the risks they pose.
1. Lifting martial law for elections would weaken Ukraine’s defence capabilities
On 24 February 2022, martial law was imposed in Ukraine — a special legal regime introduced in the event of armed aggression or threats to the country’s independence and territorial integrity. It grants additional powers to government authorities, military leadership, and local authorities to repel aggression and ensure security, while also imposing temporary restrictions on the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens.
Under martial law, changes to the Ukrainian Constitution, elections, nationwide and local referendums are prohibited — this approach ensures the continuity of presidential and parliamentary authority. Additionally, martial law prevents the suspension of the work of the Ombudsman, courts, prosecutors, and law enforcement agencies. It also restricts the right to hold strikes, mass gatherings, and protests. Moreover, certain political parties and organisations engaged in activities against Ukraine may be banned.
Thus, for elections to be held, martial law must be officially lifted, which would significantly weaken Ukraine’s defence capabilities — a move that would only benefit Russia. Let’s examine what lifting martial law during wartime would mean in practice:
1. Martial law provides the Ukrainian state and Armed Forces with essential legal mechanisms for wartime. Its cancellation would result in:
• Disruptions in arms supply chains and changes in military command structures – including the dissolution of local military administrations – which could be catastrophic during active combat.
• The cancellation of mandatory evacuations from dangerous areas, leading to increased civilian casualties.
• Weakened control over regions such as document checks, enhanced protection of strategic sites, curfews, etc.
2. Martial law limits the capabilities of pro-Russian internal forces in engaging in destructive activities, helping to prevent political destabilisation. Its removal could:
• Open the door to political strife and manipulation, which could weaken societal unity.
• Increase the influence of external forces on the elections — as seen in Romania and Germany; interference in the electoral process can be critical if the country is unprepared for it.
• Make Ukraine vulnerable to informational and subversive attacks that could divide society. Political instability after the war is also possible, but it can be addressed by ensuring institutions are in place for democratic elections, the participation of civil society, and independent media.
3. Martial law also serves a symbolic and strategic purpose. Beyond its practical benefits, martial law sends a strong message to the international community that Ukraine is committed to maintaining stable governance and national defence. It also symbolises societal unity in resisting foreign aggression. Its cancellation would provide Russia and pro-Russian forces with an opportunity to intensify their propaganda, falsely claiming that “there is no war in western and central Ukraine” while attempting to create divisions within Ukrainian society.
The US administration has already de facto withdrawn its support for Ukrainian civil society, business, reconstruction, and refugee assistance by halting USAID operations, and is now demanding reimbursement for military aid already provided. At the same time, it continues to press Ukraine to lower the draft age and hold elections during the war. In the event of a complete or partial halt to external assistance, Ukraine will need to rely even more on its own resources — both human and economic. Lifting martial law would reduce mobilisation, the military, weapons production, and funding for the war economy.
2. People in occupied territories cannot vote
As of June 2024, 4.5 million adult Ukrainians remained in Russian-occupied territories, according to Ukraine’s Ministry of Reintegration. None of them would be able to vote, as Ukrainian authorities lack physical access to these areas, making it impossible to establish polling stations, transport ballots, count votes, or ensure oversight of the election process. Any attempts to organise voting there would either mean a lack of genuine participation or manipulation by Russian occupiers.
In addition to technical issues, there is a direct threat to the safety of voters. Russian occupying authorities tightly control the population, using repression and persecution against anyone deemed disloyal. People may be intimidated, abducted, arrested, or even deported for any sign of support for Ukraine. Election commission members would also be at risk, as occupiers could force them to cooperate or even eliminate them physically.
Moreover, occupied territories suffer from extreme information isolation. Ukrainian political parties, media, and civil society groups cannot operate freely, depriving residents of access to accurate information about elections and candidates. Instead, they are subjected to relentless Russian propaganda that distorts reality and enforces psychological pressure.
Ultimately, Russia could exploit elections to consolidate its control. Allowing residents of the occupied territories to vote carries the risk that their votes would be falsified, or that the occupying authorities would create their own forged “results” for propaganda purposes. This is why fair elections can only take place after full de-occupation and the restoration of Ukrainian control over the territories.
3. Military personnel cannot vote or run for office
The Ukrainian military consists of 880,000 soldiers, many of whom are constantly in combat zones, where there is no opportunity to focus on the election process, let alone exercise their right to run for office. Even if election commissions tried to organise voting in the field, it would create additional security risks, as these polling stations would become targets for Russian attacks. Additionally, a large portion of the military moves locations daily, or even multiple times a day. Given the constantly changing frontlines, it’s impossible to predict where any given unit will be on election day. This means that even if elections were held in some military units, a significant number of soldiers would still be excluded from the process.
Given the realities of life and combat on the frontlines, ensuring the secrecy of the vote is extremely difficult, which could undermine the integrity of the process.
4. Voters face the threat of missile and artillery attacks
In the third week of February 2025, Russia launched nearly 1,150 attack drones, over 1,400 guided aerial bombs, and 35 missiles of various types against Ukraine. This equates to approximately 164 drones, 200 aerial bombs, and 5 missiles per day. Under such conditions, when Russia can strike any Ukrainian community at any moment, ensuring voter safety is impossible, particularly in frontline and border regions.
Polling stations would become easy targets for Russian attacks, as the enemy systematically bombards civilian infrastructure, especially locations with large gatherings of people. Organising voting on a set day would create predictable targets, potentially leading to mass casualties. For example, on 5 October 2023, a Russian missile struck a café and shop in the village of Hroza in the Kharkiv region, where local residents had gathered for a memorial service. The attack killed 59 people, a significant portion of the village’s population. This was a deliberate strike, coordinated by local collaborators who had fled to Russia and, under the guise of friendly conversations, gathered intelligence on the time and place of the memorial event.
Additionally, elections could provide an opportunity for sabotage and terrorist attacks. Russian agents could carry out attacks on polling stations, political party headquarters, or engage in cyberattacks. Security risks and fear among voters could lead to lower turnout, undermining the legitimacy of the election results.
5. The inability to guarantee the democratic integrity of the elections
“A democratic political system is not defined solely by holding elections; their mere existence does not indicate democracy. Elections are held in Belarus, Russia, and even Hamas came to power through elections,” says Roman Kyslenko, a political science expert, in an interview with Ukrinform. When discussing elections in Ukraine, it is crucial to consider whether they can be conducted democratically, ensuring the full functionality of free media, equal access to information, an even electoral infrastructure, and fair political competition.
International observation is a fundamental element of democratic elections, yet in wartime, it becomes nearly impossible. No international mission, including the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), can guarantee the safety of its observers in frontline communities where active hostilities are taking place. Additionally, deploying such missions takes significant time — OSCE has stated that preparing an observation mission requires at least 9 months. The absence of international monitoring undermines the transparency of the electoral process and could call its legitimacy into question.
In Ukraine, the State Register of Voters maintains records of voters and polling stations and forms voter lists. Currently, the data in the register needs to be updated, as millions of people have relocated due to the war or lost their documents. Without the proper updating of the register data, which forms the basis for voter lists, there is a risk of falsifications or the exclusion of voters from the process. It is also essential to ensure equal access to information, as many local media outlets have been destroyed by Russian shelling, making electoral campaigning in these unstable conditions potentially uneven.
One of Ukraine’s greatest challenges, particularly for post-war elections, is mass internal and external migration. As of November 2024, 4.6 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) were registered within Ukraine, while 7.6 million Ukrainian citizens were abroad, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. For Ukrainians abroad, polling stations are only set up in diplomatic missions, which are severely insufficient to accommodate millions of voters. Long queues, long travel distances, and a lack of alternative voting methods such as postal voting may prevent many citizens from participating.
Moreover, ensuring free political competition during wartime is impossible. For instance, active military personnel are not allowed to run for office, despite having the highest level of public trust.
What is required for democratic elections?
Election preparation requires detailed planning to address security, legal, and organisational challenges. Civil Network OPORA stresses the importance of preparing for post-war elections before martial law ends to develop key strategies and reach consensus on implementation mechanisms.
Key priorities include protecting elections from Russian interference, ensuring voter and electoral security, adapting to Ukraine’s migration realities, and addressing legal shortcomings noted in OSCE/ODIHR recommendations, which are also part of Ukraine’s EU accession process. Before elections, security assessments across Ukraine must be conducted, including mine clearance, rebuilding electoral infrastructure, and preventing Russian meddling. Furthermore, democratic elections require strict control over political party financing to prevent Russian influence and combating disinformation in media and social networks, which involves cooperation with Meta, Google, TikTok.
Civil Network OPORA has developed a detailed roadmap for post-war elections in Ukraine, incorporating previous expert discussions involving official stakeholders such as Ukraine’s Central Election Commission, Ukrainian Parliament, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This document also serves as a call to Ukrainian authorities to begin discussing future elections and identifying effective solutions.
