The law establishes a framework whereby the SSU’s Anti-Terrorist Centre can unilaterally initiate inclusion of groups in the list, with decisions taken in standard (within 15 working days) or expedited (within 3 working days) procedures. Organisations or groups may be listed as terrorist based on:
1. Information from international organisations of which Ukraine is a member;
2. Evidence of existence or links to terrorist entities, including:
- Decisions by foreign authorities or courts recognised by Ukraine;
- Court verdicts against Ukrainian legal entities, where authorised representatives committed terrorism-related offences;
- Convictions of individuals under Articles 258–258-6 of the Criminal Code, if their connection to a terrorist group is established.
The law also mandates that a public list be published, indicating the name, structure, leadership, and associated sanctions applied to each listed organisation. However, the law does not clearly define what constitutes a "terrorist organisation", and permits the listing of non-registered and informal groups, creating a risk of overreach. While registered political parties are exempt, other civic structures—including volunteer groups and activist collectives—are not.
Although advocacy led to the removal of some problematic elements in the second reading, the final version of the law expanded discretion by allowing decisions to be made not only by the SSU but also in coordination with undefined government bodies, increasing the potential for overreach.
Lack of safeguards could lead to abuse and rights violations
From a legal perspective, the law poses risks to freedom of association, especially for informal civic initiatives and human rights defenders. The absence of an independent judicial mechanism for inclusion or delisting, combined with undefined criteria for assessing “threats to national security”, contradicts the principle of legal certainty.
The law does not establish a clear procedure for recognising a group as terrorist before listing, nor does it define how unregistered or loosely organised collectives are to be identified, named, or assessed. This legal ambiguity undermines the principle of foreseeability and increases the risk of arbitrary inclusion. Furthermore, the law contradicts existing frameworks, such as the list under Law No. 361-IX, which applies strictly to legal and natural persons.
There is no requirement to notify the listed entity, nor are there guaranteed procedural rights (such as representation or defence) during the listing process. This could lead to reputational damage, legal exclusion, and indirect criminalisation of legitimate civic activity.
Chilling effect on grassroots activism
The law may disproportionately affect grassroots initiatives, informal volunteer collectives, or groups operating in politically sensitive areas. For instance, if a single member of such a group is convicted under a terrorism-related offence, there is a risk the entire group—regardless of its nature—could be designated as a terrorist organisation.
This possibility creates a chilling effect, where activists may avoid collaboration, self-censor, or disband informal structures out of fear of being associated with alleged offences committed by others. Civil society organisations warn that this could curtail civic mobilisation at a time when broad public engagement is essential for Ukraine’s resilience and recovery. To prevent misuse and protect civic space, Ukraine’s government must urgently revise and clarify the implementation framework for this law. Recommendations include:
- Defining "terrorist organisation" in line with existing legal frameworks;
- Ensuring judicial review and appeal procedures, including notification and due process rights for affected entities;
- Limiting the scope to registered legal entities to avoid overreach against informal or voluntary associations;
- Conducting transparent consultations with civil society and legal experts before enforcement begins.
