COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document Sixth Progress Report on Ukraine's implementation of the action plan on visa liberalisation
Date: 2015-12-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: EU visa policy, Ukraine, application of the law, biometrics, border control, fight against crime, fundamental rights, migration control, right of asylum

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 18.12.2015  
SWD(2015) 705 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Accompanying the document 

Sixth Progress Report on Ukraine's implementation of the action plan on visa 
liberalisation 

{COM(2015) 905 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
1. INTRODUCTION 

This  Commission  staff  working  document  (CSWD)  accompanies  the  Sixth  Progress  Report 
on the Implementation by Ukraine of the Action Plan on Visa Liberalisation (VLAP).1 

Together with the report, the CSWD builds on the information and the assessment provided in 
the Fifth Progress Report on the Implementation by Ukraine of the VLAP2 and, in line with 
the  methodology  outlined  in  the  VLAP,  provides  a  detailed  analysis  of  the  most  relevant 
developments  relating  to  the  implementation  of  the  second-phase  VLAP  benchmarks  for 
effective  and  sustainable  implementation  of  relevant  measures.  The  annex  to  the  CSWD 
includes  an  updated  assessment  of  the  potential  migratory  and  security  impacts  on  the 
European Union (EU) of future visa liberalisation for Ukraine. 

The  factual  information  and  assessment  included  in  the  CSWD  is  based  on  the  evaluation 
missions  led  by  the  European  Commission,  assisted  by  experts  from  EU  Member  States,  to 
Ukraine  between  31 August 2015  and  2 October 2015,  and  updated  information  received  by 
the Commission from the Ukrainian authorities. 

The annex to the CSWD — the Assessment of Migratory and Security Impacts — is primarily 
based on information provided by EU Agencies and the EU Border Assistance Mission to the 
Republic of Moldova and Ukraine (EUBAM), and other available sources, including Eurostat 
data. 

The  CSWD  follows  the  VLAP  structure.  In  the  sections  corresponding  to  VLAP  blocks,  it 
lists all the second-phase benchmarks and describes their state of implementation, focusing in 
particular  on  developments  that  took  place  after  the  fifth  progress  report  was  published  on 
8 May 2015. 

2. ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE VLAP 

2.1. Block 1: Document security, including biometrics 

(cid:190)  Gradual  roll-out  of  biometric  international  passports  in  compliance  with  ICAO 
standards,  including  at  Ukrainian  consulates  abroad,  and  phase-out  of  non-
ICAO compliant passports 

The  production  and  issuance  of  a  new  type  of  passport  started  on  12 January 2015  with  the 
ordinary  passport  (passport  of  the  citizen  of  Ukraine  for  travelling  abroad).  Since  the  same 
conditions and procedures still apply the previous positive assessment is confirmed. 

To mid-August 2015, the State Migration Service (SMS) issued 581 000 biometric passports 
and  800 000  non-biometric  passports.  The  balance  between  the  two  has  shifted:  half  of  the 
current applications are for biometric passports. The issuance of the new ordinary passport in 
the  Ukrainian  diplomatic  representations  overseas  where  the  applications  can  be  lodged 
started in April 2015. 

1 COM(2015)905 final. 
2 COM(2014) 336 final. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Electronic diplomatic and service passports started to be issued in May 2015. The pattern and 
security features used are the same as for the ordinary passport but with different colours for 
the cover (black for the service passport and green for the diplomatic passport). 

An important change to the legislative framework for phasing out non-biometric passports is 
under  consideration.  A  set  of  amendments  to  the  Law  on  the  Unified  State  Demographic 
Registry  was  approved  by  the  Government  on  2 September 2015.  These  changes  make  the 
electronic  passport  and  live  capture  of  fingerprints  mandatory  except  in  cases  of  obvious 
incapacity or for children under 14 years of age. This removes the current option of obtaining 
a non-biometric  passport. Other  amendments in this decision aim to increase the number of 
authorities  assigned  to  processing  front-office  passport  applications;  progressively  replacing 
the  existing  internal  passport  with  a  new  electronic  ID  card  and  using  facial  recognition 
technology together with the fingerprint identification system currently in place. 

The new biometric ID cards are being tested and will be issued from 1 January 2016. 

(cid:190)  High  level  of  integrity  and  security  of  the  application,  personalisation  and 
distribution  process  for  international  passports,  as  well  as  domestic  passports 
and other breeder documents; 

The  Personalisation  Centre  for  passports  is  in  the  state  enterprise  Polygraph  Combine 
Ukraina.  Since  March  2013  the  State  printer  has  been  certified  according  to  ISO  standards 
9001, 14001 and 27001 for quality and information security management systems. It produces 
a  wide  range  of  secure  documents  including  passports,  ID  cards,  driving  licences  and  bank 
cards. 

The  necessary  works  have  been  carried  out  to  house  the  personalisation  and  processing 
machines to produce the biometric ID card, which is planned to be issued from January 2016. 
This  ID  card,  which  will  gradually  replace  the  current  internal  passport,  will  be  an  ID-1-
format  polycarbonate-based  document,  including  a  contactless  chip.  The  personalisation 
equipment will include three sets of machines able to produce 3.5 million cards a year. 

The biometric ID card is part of a new strategic approach to identity management and secure 
document issuance from the Ukrainian authorities. It aims to build a coherent and trustworthy 
system  while  increasing  the  quality  of  service  for  Ukrainian  citizens  and  ensuring  data 
protection.  The  Ukrainian  authorities  are  committed  to  phasing  out  the  current  internal 
passport within five years. 

Amendments  to  the  rules  of  procedure  were  adopted  on  19 August 2015  to  tackle  any  side-
effect of name changes on the issuance of travel and ID documents. Both the internal passport 
and the passport for travelling abroad are cancelled in the event of a name change. Since the 
decision  on  name  changes  is  taken  by  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  it  has  to  send  the  relevant 
information  electronically  to  the  State  Migration  Service  and  the  border  guard  service.  The 
passport issued on the basis of the former name is cancelled. Restrictions on citizens’ freedom 
to change their name and surname have been also introduced. The request can be denied for 
reasons to do with crime; if the applicant is under investigation or administrative surveillance; 
if there is a request to enforce foreign law or if the applicant has submitted incorrect or false 
data.  In  2014  2 680  name  changes  were  decided;  in  the  first  half  of  2015  the  number  was 
9 313. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:190)  Prompt  and  systematic  reporting  to  Interpol  /  the  LASP  database  on  lost  and 
stolen  passports;  regular  exchange  of  passport  specimens  and  cooperation  on 
document security with the EU 

Reporting to Interpol / the LASP database on lost and stolen Ukrainian passports occurs daily. 
A  daily  update  of  the  situation  is  performed  and  the  relevant  information  is  permanently 
available to the border guard service via a direct link. 

2.2. Block 2: Integrated Border Management, Migration Management, and Asylum 

2.2.1. INTEGRATED BORDER MANAGEMENT 

(cid:190)  Effective  implementation  of  the  Law  on  Border  Control  of  November  2009 
through  adequate  border  checks  and  border  surveillance,  procedures  and 
operational effectiveness, situational picture at national, regional and local level, 
including 
intelligence  and  data-flow 
management  as  well  as  direct  access  and  consultation  of  relevant  national  and 
international databases 

implementation  of  risk  analysis, 

The period covered by the Integrated order Management (IBM) Strategy and its Action Plan 
expires at the end of 2015. The State Border Guard Service (SBGS) has drafted a proposal for 
the  period  after  2015.  The  main  objectives  are  to  increase  border  security  in  response  to 
current challenges and threats, to improve national integrated border management in line with 
European standards, to improve systems for recruitment, training and human resources and to 
ensure  openness  and  transparency.  The  proposal  is  divided  into  two  phases,  the  first  up  to 
2017 and the second up to 2020. 

On  17 September  and  22 October 2015,  meetings  of  the  virtual  analytical  contact  centre 
discussed the updates to the IBM Concept. As of 6 November 2015 the SBGS was gathering 
proposals from line ministries and agencies on the draft Concept and its implementing Action 
plan. The strategy was intended to enter into force on 1 January 2016. 

To ensure a comprehensive approach, the Ukrainian President endorsed a “Road Map on joint 
operational  border  management  with  EU  Member  States  and  Moldova  at  the  end  of  2014. 
The  road  map  and  accompanying  Action  Plan  envisages  shared  border  control,  joint  border 
patrolling  and  operational  exchange  of  data  and  risk  analysis.  In  line  with  the  road  map, 
Ukraine has taken some steps in the past months, including preparation of the Shared Border 
Crossing Point Agreement with Slovakia and, on 4 November 2015, and signing an agreement 
on automated exchange of border crossing data on persons and vehicles across the Moldova-
Ukraine border. 

(cid:190)  Provision  of  adequate  infrastructure,  technical  equipment,  IT  technologies, 
financial  and  human  resources  in  accordance  with  the  IBM  Strategy  to  be 
training  programmes  and 
adopted,  and  effective 
anticorruption measures 

implementation  of 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Recent  progress  in  developing  technical  equipment  and  IT  systems  includes  updating  the 
Arkan system, an integrated inter-agency information/telecommunication system for checking 
people, vehicles and goods crossing the state border. In 2015, parts of the operational system 
Hart-10 (the SBGS’s internal IT system) will be updated. An electronic register of authentic 
and  forged  travel  documents  is  in  trial  use.  This  new  national  database  is  to  provide 
information on travel documents in addition to that from (international and national) sources 
such as Interpol and Arkan. 

(cid:190)  Improvement  of  inter-agency  cooperation  (including  exchange  of  data  between 
the  Border  Guard  Service  and  law  enforcement  agencies)  and  international 
cooperation, including implementation of working arrangement with Frontex to 
a high level of effectiveness 

Intra-agency  cooperation  is  changing.  Firstly,  the  process  of  reducing  the  number  of 
authorities  working  at  the  border  has  begun.  All  current  stakeholders  will  continue  to 
participate in IBM, but control both of people and goods crossing the border will be carried 
out only by the SBGS and Customs. Secondly, the SBGS and Customs have worked together 
more through the Virtual Centres. Since the beginning of August 2015, representatives of the 
SBGS  and  Customs  have  provided  information  for  passengers  on  border  crossings  and 
customs procedures. The SBGS also launched a public survey to obtain feedback on the work 
of SBGS staff. 

Very good progress was made in checks on cross-border traffic. Border checks are carried out 
extensively  for  every  passenger  and  checks  against  national  databases  are  carried  out.  The 
current situation enables staff to read the open data on a chip and the closed data on Ukrainian 
passports. 

 2.2.2.  Migration management 

(cid:190)  Continued effective implementation of the EU-Ukraine readmission agreement 
and measures for the reintegration of Ukrainian citizens (returning voluntarily 
or readmitted) 

As  of  25 September 2015,  Ukraine  had  17  bilateral  agreements.  The  readmission  agreement 
with the European Union entered into force on 1 January 2008. Negotiation procedures (‘draft 
readmission agreements’)  are still ongoing with Kazakhstan,  Armenia, Belarus,  Kyrgyzstan, 
Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The dialogue on implementing protocols (to 
the  readmission  agreements)  is  continuing  with  11  European  Union  countries  (the  Benelux 
countries, Portugal, Cyprus, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Malta and Italy). The texts 
of the Agreement and the Implementing Protocol with Switzerland and Serbia are also under 
discussion. 

The  overall  implementation  of  the  readmission  agreement  is  satisfactory  in  terms  of  daily 
follow-up, which is reflected in high acceptance rate of readmission applications by Ukraine 
(over  90 %  for  the  2014  (84.2 %)  and  80 %  for  2015  —  up  to  31 August 2015)  and  met 
deadlines in accordance with Section II of the Agreement between the European Community 
and Ukraine on readmission of persons (Official Journal L 332, 18/12/2007). 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ukraine  participates  in  the  EU  Pilot  Initiative  to  Monitor  Readmission  in  Ukraine  and 
Pakistan (Monitor). 

(cid:190)  Effective  implementation  of  legal  framework  for  migration  management, 
including provision of administrative structures with adequate human resources 
with clear and relevant competences for all aspects of migration management, as 
well as effective cooperation between relevant agencies 

The  Law  on  External  Labour  Migration  was  adopted  on  5 November 2015.  The  law  was 
signed by the President on 21 November. This is a very positive step, as the law will regulate 
reintegration,  including  employment  opportunities  in  Ukraine  when  Ukrainian  nationals 
return  after  working  abroad.  The  new  scheme  setting  out  responsibilities,  the  competent 
authorities, measures and tasks should be drafted immediately after adoption. 

The State Migration Service (SMS) is the main authority within the Ministry of the Internal 
Affairs responsible for migration and asylum issues in Ukraine. 

Training, including language training, was given to staff working in accommodation centres, 
case  handlers and  judges.  In  cooperation with the Taras Shevchenko National  University of 
Kiev,  the  State  Migration  Service  has  developed  a  targeted  curriculum,  ‘English  for 
professional  communication  in  the  migration  processes’.  The  course  is  designed  to  improve 
the English skills of the State Migration Service. 

(cid:190)  Migration profile established and regularly updated and effective analysis of data 

on migration stocks and flows 

The  migration  profile  for  2014  has  been  completed  and  published  on  the  SMS  website.  On 
29 April 2015, the Methodology for Irregular Migration Risk Analysis was approved. With a 
view to creating a database for monitoring migration processes, the current software is being 
upgraded  and  steps  are  being  taken  to  incorporate  the  SMS  databases.  On  29 May 2015,  a 
Contact Analytical Centre for Monitoring Migration Processes was created. On 18 June 2015 
the State Migration Service approved its Working Plan for 2015. 

The centre will perform various tasks including: establishing the ‘Ukraine migration profile’, 
evaluating  the  risks  of  migration  issues,  informing  other  competent  State  bodies  about 
migratory issues, etc. The reports produced will be shared with other stakeholders. 

(cid:190)  Consistent  implementation  of  an  effective  methodology  on  inland  detection  of 
irregular  migration,  risk  analysis  (including  the  reporting  of  relevant  agencies 
and analysis on each administrative level e.g. local, central), and investigation of 
cases of organised facilitated irregular migration, including effective cooperation 
between relevant agencies 

Currently,  the  SMS  conducts  operations  to  apprehend  irregular  migrants  jointly  with  the 
Ministry of Internal Affairs or the Ukrainian Security Service. The SMS has no operational 
capacity  to  perform  such  tasks  independently  due  to  its  civil  status  and  lack  of  law 
enforcement capacity to detect and apprehend irregular migrants inland.  However,  the SMS 
cooperates with the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the State Border Guard Service. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  structure  of  the  SMS  has  also  been  optimised  and  several  units  whose  work  involves 
‘migration control’ have been allocated more staff. 

(cid:190)  Provision  of  adequate 

(including  detention  centres)  and 
strengthening  of  responsible  bodies  to  ensure  effective  expulsion  of  illegally 
residing and/or transiting third country nationals from Ukrainian territory 

infrastructure 

In 2015 the structure of the SMS was optimised and staffing of the units responsible for 
migration control was increased. On 27 May 2015 the Government of Ukraine adopted a 
resolution envisaging that from 1 January 2016 the number of SMS staff would increase by 
500, including officers tasked with fighting illegal migration and inland detections.   

There are two Migrant Accommodation Centres for irregular migrants located in Chernihyv 
(Rozudiv),  with  a  capacity  of  208  persons,  and  Valin  (Zhuravichy),  with  a  capacity  of  156 
persons. And a building in Mykolaiv (Martynivske) has been completed, with a capacity for 
about 100 persons. 

2.2.3.  Asylum policy 

(cid:190)  Effective  implementation  of  asylum  legislation,  including  provision  of  adequate 
infrastructure  (including  reception  centres)  and  strengthening  of  responsible 
bodies,  in  particular  in  the  area  of  asylum  procedures,  reception  of  asylum 
seekers and protection of their rights (including documentation of asylum seekers 
and  refugees  in  order  to  ensure  effective  access  to  their  rights),  as  well  as 
integration of refugees 

Reception of asylum seekers has been reformed: food corresponding to a certain daily amount 
of required nutritional value per person, independent of cost, is provided in kind in line with 
the Council of Ministers Decree on food standards provided at the temporary accommodation 
centres  for  persons  seeking  international  protection  and  for  beneficiaries  of  international 
protection  of  11 March 2015  (CMU  Decree,  No 144).  They  are  thus  no  longer  linked  to 
financial limits. At the Odessa reception  centre,  applicants  are  said  to  receive  three  meals a 
day (adjusted to the religious beliefs of the applicants), receive clothes, have access to proper 
education, UNHCR, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and interpreters, and can take 
part in leisure activities (sports, local activities organised at the centre such as art workshops) 
or join language courses. There is also a playroom for children (that is filled with games and 
toys).  Special  attention  is  said  to  be  granted  to  family  unity,  care  for  persons  with  special 
needs, separate accommodation for single men, women, etc. As regards healthcare, depending 
on  the  medical  problem,  the  applicant  is  referred  to  a  local  medical  centre  or  to  a  bigger 
facility if a specialist institution/intervention is needed. The centre covers primary healthcare 
needs. 

Registration  practices  were  further  consolidated:  The  ‘refugee’  subsystem  of  the  foreigners’ 
database  was  installed.  The  transfer  of  existing  data  to  the  new  subsystem.  The  State 
Migration Service has a clear and concrete view of the IT process, and further IT progress is 
expected to be completed by the end of 2015 or the beginning of 2016. 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Reception  capacity  has  not  been  increased  in  the  reporting  period.  Ukraine  currently  has  a 
reception  capacity  of  100  places  available  in  Odessa  and  130  places  in  the Transcarpathian 
Region. The opening of a new accommodation centre in Yahotyn, Kyiv Region with around 
353 additional places was postponed from this year to 2017. In 2015, UAH 17 303 million has 
been allocated  for this accommodation centre, of  which  UAH 15 089  million  is  allocated  to 
setting  up  the  centre.  The  refurbishment  of  100  additional  places  in  the  Odessa  temporary 
accommodation centre depends on unblocking the funds earmarked. A rough estimate puts the 
renovation costs for the accommodation wing at around UAH 12 million. The administrative 
building would also need to be renovated, costing an extra UAH 10 million. 

The  detention  of  asylum  seekers  in  Ukraine  is  not  currently  regulated  by  law.  In  practice, 
asylum  seekers  are  detained  under  certain  conditions.  The  main  reason  for  administrative 
detention of international protection applicants on Ukrainian territory appears to be to prevent 
further attempts at irregular border crossing into another country. 

Article 30.3 of the Law on the Legal Status of Foreigners and Stateless Persons only regulates 
the  detention  of  irregular  migrants.  A  draft  law  on  foreigners  was  sent  to  Parliament  on 
21 September 2015  and  adopted  in  first  reading  on  10 November 2015.  It  envisages  the 
following amendments concerning the detention of persons subject to return procedures: 

•  There will be a three-monthly judicial review / court review of forced return cases for 
migrants in closed facilities (detention centres), to determine the effectiveness of the 
(State  Migration  Service’s)  identification  and  documentation  activities  to  ensure 
forced return and to take into account new information that may prevent forced return 
(Ukraine ratified the European Convention on Human Rights in 1997). 

•  The  maximum  detention  period  for  irregular  migrants  will  be  extended  from  12 
months  (under  the  Law  on  the  Legal  Status  of  Foreigners  and  Stateless  Persons, 
Article 30.4) to 18 months.  

These amendments are intended to be inserted into the Administrative Code in a ‘new’ Article 
183(7): ‘Peculiarities of proceedings in cases on detention of foreigners and stateless persons 
who  are  subject  to  forced  return’.  Appeals  have  suspensive  effect  (including  appeals  to  the 
European Court of Human Rights). 

Procedural safeguards have been strengthened: 100 regional and local legal aid centres, which 
are  publicly  financed  (under  Articles  15,  16  and  17  of  the  Law  on  Free  Legal  Aid)  started 
work on 1 July 2015, under Order No 331/5 of 10 March 2015. Every region of Ukraine has 
between  three  and  nine  centres.  According  to  the  Ukrainian  authorities,  a  budget  of  some 
UAH 300  million  has  been  allocated  to  set  up  the  centres,  which  have  a  roster  of  5 000 
lawyers  available  according  to  need.  Interpreters  are  to  be  paid  from  the  budget  for  the 
centres,  which  requires  amendments  increasing  their  budget  to  cover  this.  The  centres’ 
establishment  followed  amendments  to  the  Law  on  Free  Legal  Aid  covering  both  ‘free 
primary legal aid’ (Section II of the law) and ‘free secondary legal aid’ (Section III). Article 
13  defines  ‘secondary  legal  aid’:  defence  against  prosecution  (2.1),  representation  in  the 
courts, other State agencies, etc. (2.2), and drafting procedural documents (2.3). The Ministry 
of Justice is responsible for ‘free secondary legal aid’. It applies to a broad category of people, 
including those covered by  the 2011 Law on Refugees, including asylum seekers. The legal 
aid centres already have access to the list of interpreters used by the State Migration Service. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  legal  aid  centres  have  so  far  received  few  requests  relating  to  asylum.  Flyers  and 
information  leaflets  are  being  drafted.  According  to  the  ‘Ukrainian  Administrative  Justice 
Court  Code’,  the  deadline  for  appealing  against  first-instance  decisions  on  asylum 
applications  is  five  days  from  the  date  of  receipt  of  the  first-instance  decision.  The  asylum 
seeker  must  first  appeal  against  the  decision  in  writing,  without  having  to  substantiate  the 
appeal or needing representation. They are then invited (by the appeal body) to substantiate 
the appeal. 

Several  steps  have  been  taken  to  improve  implementation  of  asylum  law.  According  to  the 
Ukrainian  authorities,  country  of  origin  information  is  available  to  case  handlers  on  the 
website of the State Migration Service. 

 ‘Information on advanced training of the State Migration Service employees in 2013-2015’ 
(State  Migration  Service,  7 October 2015)  indicates  the  number  of  State  Migration  Service 
employees  that  have  undergone  advanced  training,  including  ‘Professional  development  on 
foreign languages’. The information sheet ‘Information on number of employees of the State 
Migration  Service  of  Ukraine,  Temporary  Accommodation  Centres  for  Refugees  and 
Temporary Accommodation Centres for Foreigners and Stateless Persons who illegally reside 
in Ukraine who speak and study foreign languages’, State Migration Service, 7 October 2015, 
indicates  the  number  of  employees  mastering  one  or  several  foreign  languages  (including 
English) and to what extent these staff members are spread across the countries. 

In 2015 the National School of Judges carried out a series of specialised training courses (in 
Ukraine) on ‘case adjudication’, and ‘the relationship between the 1951 Refugee Convention 
and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms’. 

Since  2012  (‘Statistical  information  for  2012,  2013,  2014,  6  months  of  2015  on  protection 
seekers  in  Ukraine’,  State  Migration  Service,  7 October 2015)  the  rate  of  ‘protection’ 
(encompassing  ‘refugee  status’,  ‘complementary  protection’  and  ‘subsidiary  protection’ 
within  the  meaning  of  Articles 1  and  5  of  the  Law  on  Refugees  and  Persons  in  Need  of 
Subsidiary  or  Temporary  Protection  in  Ukraine)  has  significantly  increased.  From  roughly 
15 %  (2011:  241  people  given  protection  as  against  1 573  applications) to  70 %  (2014:  806 
people protected; 1 173 applications). Afghanistan and Syria are the main countries of origin. 

As  regards  rules  on  the  status,  rights  and  obligations  of  those  foreigners  who  cannot  be 
returned,  but  who  are  entitled  to  international  protection,  under  Article  17.4  of  the  Law  on 
Legal Status of Foreigners and Stateless Persons, foreigners and stateless persons who have 
not  been  forcibly  returned  from  Ukraine  before  their  stay  in  a  closed  (detention)  facility 
expires are provided with a ‘temporary residence permit’ because, for some reason, the person 
could  not  be  removed  from  the  territory  (for  instance  because  no  substitute  passport  or 
‘laissez-passer’  could  be  issued).  The  maximum  stay  at  a  detention  facility  is  currently  12 
months  (Article  30.4).  The  ‘temporary  residence  permit’  confirms  the  holder’s  personal 
identity  (as  declared)  and  permission  to  stay  in  Ukraine.  The  permit  can  be  renewed  and 
grants  a  series  of  rights  and  obligations:  access  to  healthcare,  social  services,  to  register  a 
marriage, etc. After three years, the permit can be made ‘permanent’ if further conditions —
governed by the Law on the Legal Status of Foreigners — are met. A ‘Strategy of the State 
Migration Policy for the period to 2025 (to be approved by the Cabinet of Ministers) includes 
as  ‘Objective  10’:  ‘introduce(s)  a  proper  mechanism  and  programmes  for  regularisation  of 
irregular migrants’. 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.3. Block 3: Public Order and Security 

2.3.1.  Preventing and fighting organised crime, terrorism and corruption 

(cid:190)  Implementation of the strategy and action plan to fight against organised crime 

including effective coordination between the relevant authorities 

The National Security Strategy of Ukraine (Strategy), approved on 26 May 2015 envisages a 
series  of  measures  to  reform  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs.  The  Ministry  will  be 
transformed into a civilian central body of executive authority that drafts and implements state 
policy on law enforcement, protection of the state border, migration and civil protection. The 
strategy  provides  for  most  law  enforcement  functions,  except  combating  crimes  against 
national  security,  to  be  transferred  from  the  Security  Service  to  the  law  enforcement 
authorities. The National Defence Security Council is drafting an action plan. 

The reform of internal affairs bodies is ongoing. The Law on Amendments to certain pieces of 
Legislation  Regarding  the  Reform  of  the  Bodies  of  the  Interior,  of  12 February 2015,  was 
intended to optimise the structure of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. When the GUBOZ was 
dismantled, the task of fighting organised crime was transferred to the Directorate of Criminal 
Search. A specialised Department was set up and specialist units were also created in regional 
offices  to  investigate  crime,  including  radicalised,  organised  crime  and  organised  criminal 
groups formed on ethnic or international lines. 

On  2 July 2015,  Parliament  adopted  the  Law  on  the  National  Police,  entered  into  force  on 
7 November 2015.  The  National  Police  would  be  subordinated  to  the  Ministry  of  Internal 
Affairs  and  would  also  carry  out  some  tasks  related  to  combating  organised  crime  and 
ensuring public order. 

Under Article 5.3 of the Law on Organisational and Legal Principles of Combating Organised 
Crime, the state authorities involved in combating organised crime include the following: 

• 
• 
• 
• 

• 
• 
• 
• 

the internal affairs authorities of Ukraine 
the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU); 
the prosecution authorities of Ukraine; 
the  tax  authorities,  the  authorities  of  the  State  Border  Guard  Service  of  Ukraine,  the 
state financial monitoring authorities; 
the penitentiary authorities and facilities, pre-trial detention facilities; 
the intelligence authority of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine; 
the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine; 
the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). 

The  tasks  of  the  above  authorities  are  primarily  detection,  investigation,  suppression  and 
prevention of offences committed by participants in organised criminal groups, and bringing 
of  perpetrators  to  justice.  Their  remits  are  set  out  in  the  Law  on  Organisational  and  Legal 
Principles of Combating Organised Crime,  the Law on Operative and Search Activities, the 
10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Law on the Police (the Law on National Police, of 
7 November 2015),  the  Law  on  the  Security  Service  of  Ukraine,  the  Criminal  Procedure 
Code, and other laws. 

Jurisdiction  over  crimes  of  this  type  is  governed  by  Article  216  of  the  Criminal  Procedural 
Code, based on the general criminal jurisdiction of the internal affairs authorities, the Security 
Service (SSU), the Prosecutor’s Office (the State Bureau of Investigations once established), 
the authorities monitoring compliance with tax legislation, and the National Anti-Corruption 
Bureau.  This  jurisdiction  in  turn  is  derived  from  the  areas  of  activity  of  the  relevant  law 
enforcement authorities (combating general crime, crimes against national security, crimes in 
office, tax crimes, and criminal corruption). 

The authorities proposed to limit the functions of the Security Service of Ukraine in drafting 
amendments  to  the  Criminal  Procedure  Code  in  line  with  the  EU’s  recommendations  on 
Ukraine’s implementation of the EU-Ukraine Action Plan on Visa Liberalisation, with a view 
to  clarifying  the  jurisdiction  of  pre-trial  investigation  authorities.  On  10  November, 
Parliament  adopted  the  law,  which  aims  to  streamline  the  chain  of  responsibilities  for  the 
various steps of investigation. The amendments to Article 216, ‘Investigative Competence’, of 
the Criminal Procedure Code provide for limiting the SSU’s remit to pre-trial investigation of 
cases  in  the  sphere  of  national  security,  defence  and  terrorism;  and  strictly  delineating  the 
investigative remit of the State Bureau of Investigations (SBI), which was to be set up under 
the Criminal Procedure Code. 

On  12 November 2015,  Parliament  adopted  the  law  establishing  the  State  Bureau  of 
Investigation.  The  SBI  was  to  be  set  up  by  20 November 2017  and  would  be  entitled  to 
conduct pre-trial investigation of the following crimes: 

1.  crimes committed by high-ranking officials under Article 9 of the Law on the Public 
Service,  certain  public  service  officials,  judges,  prosecutors  and  officers  of  law 
enforcement  authorities,  except  where  they  fall  to  the  NABU  under  Section  5  of 
Article 9; 

2.  crimes  committed  by  NABU  officials  and  prosecutors  in  the  Specialised  Anti-
Corruption  Prosecutor’s  Office,  unless  investigation  falls  to  the  NABU’s  Internal 
Control Unit under Section 5 of Article 9; 
3.  crimes under Article 333 of the Criminal Code; 
4.  crimes  against  the  reputation  of  State  authorities  or  local  government  or  civil 
associations, against journalists and the judiciary, except for crimes under Articles 354 
(in relation to employees of legal entities under public law), 359, 383, 384, 385, 389, 
390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396 of the Criminal Code; 

5.  crimes  using  computers,  computer  systems  and  networks,  or  telecommunication 

networks; 

6.  crimes in the sphere of official and professional public service activities, unless they 

fall to the NABU under Section 5 of Article 9; 

7.  military crimes, except for crimes under Article 422 of the Criminal Code; 
8.  crimes against peace, human security and international law; 
9.  crimes against peace and security of humanity and international order. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Until  the  SBI  was  operational,  investigations  which  fell  to  it  would  be  conducted  by  the 
prosecution authorities, internal affairs bodies and the security service. 

Ukrainian  witness  protection  law  provides  for  protective  measures  including  surveillance, 
replacement of identity documents, change of appearance, relocation, etc. Funding of the most 
sensitive measures to protect judicial witnesses, such as relocation and identity change, should 
be ensured. 

Overall, a unitary vision for fighting organised crime is still work in progress. As the complex 
reform process — shifting powers from law enforcement agencies to new institutions such as 
SBI — is ongoing, implementation of the reforms in practice needs to be monitored. 

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  the  State  Programme  for  Combating  Trafficking  in  Human 
Beings,  including  effective  coordination  between  state  agencies  and  effective 
protection of victims of trafficking including children 

A  new  State  Programme  to  Combat  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings  has  been  proposed  for 
approval by the Cabinet of Ministers and is scheduled to run from 1 January 2016 until 2020. 
The programme aims to prevent trafficking in human beings, make prosecution of traffickers 
more effective, protect the rights of victims and assist them. 

The Interdepartmental Council in charge of supervising policy and action against trafficking 
should  be  reinforced,  taking  into  account  need  to  improve  coordination  of  anti-trafficking 
activities  by  ensuring  that  the  Council  and  the  coordinating  councils  set  up  at  oblast  level 
work well. 

Among other actions, it is planned to improve the procedure for deciding the status of a victim 
of trafficking (by amending the Law on Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and other 
regulations)  by  making  the  local  state  administrations  and  local  self-government  bodies 
responsible  for  this.  Further  amendments  should  be  envisaged,  establishing  a  recovery  and 
reflection  period  for  those  whom  the  relevant  anti-trafficking  authorities  have  reasonable 
grounds to believe are victims of trafficking. 

The process of identifying  victims  is based on a formal procedure introduced as an integral 
part of the national anti-trafficking mechanism. A national mechanism to allow the relevant 
bodies  to  work  together  was  also  set  up.  However,  identification  relies  on  the  victims 
themselves applying for it. Therefore, further important measures should be taken to improve 
the process of granting ‘victim of trafficking’ status. 

Regarding  victim  identification  and  monitoring,  attention  should  be  paid  to  internal 
trafficking, especially given the huge number of internally displaced persons (IDP). The vast 
majority  of  this  group  face  severe  difficulties  in  normalizing  their  life  conditions,  which 
makes them highly vulnerable to trafficking. Moreover, only a few foreign victims have been 
formally identified. 

The number of registered victims of trafficking for all forms of exploitation, including the sex 
industry  and  labour,  is  considered  low.  Although  relevant  statistics  are  compiled  by  several 
sources (the Ministry of Social Policy, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the International 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Organisation for Migration (IOM) mission to Ukraine), no centralised monitoring system is in 
place.  According  to  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs’  statistics,  up  to  September  2015,  93 
trafficked victims had been reported: 53 women, 37 men and 3 children. In 2015, ‘victim of 
trafficking’ status has been granted to 45 people: 21 women, 22 men, and 2 children. 

Various training courses have been given to professionals who come into contact with victims 
and potential victims of trafficking, but frontline border officials need to be given operational 
indicators  and  guidelines  to  expand  their  capacity  for  proactive  identification,  and  to  be 
trained in using such tools. The indicators should be regularly updated, in line with emerging 
trends  in  human  trafficking,  especially  in  the  context  of  local  conflict  (internal  trafficking, 
trafficking of children). The indicators are essential to proactive identification of victims and 
so  should  reflect  the  changing  nature  of  trafficking  and  types  of  exploitation.  Ukrainian 
authorities  should  ensure  that  all  professionals  likely  to  come  into  contact  with  potential 
victims  of  human  trafficking  are  fully  aware  of  the  identification  procedure  and  receive 
regular  training  that  enables  them  to  adopt  a  proactive  attitude  and  take  action  to  identify 
victims, particularly among vulnerable groups such as children and IDPs. 

Prevention  measures  have  been  taken  by  central  authorities,  NGOs  and  international 
organisations  in  the  last  year.  Bearing  in  mind  the  vulnerability  of  the  rural  population  to 
trafficking, and particularly the risk of trafficking and various forms of exploitation that IDPs 
face,  state  anti-trafficking  actors  need  to  increase  their  efforts  to  discourage  demand  for 
services ‘offered’ by potential victims and vulnerable people, in partnership with civil society 
and the private sector. 

NGOs  play  a  vital  role  in  combating  trafficking  in  Ukraine  through  awareness-raising, 
training relevant professionals (e.g. police officers, social workers, medical doctors, lawyers, 
and teachers) and assisting victims of trafficking. Expanding cooperation with civil society on 
anti-trafficking action should be considered, including involving trade unions and the private 
sector in planning and implementing national policy. 

The  International  Women’s  Rights  Centre  La  Strada  Ukraine,  which  has  been  active  in  the 
anti-trafficking field since 1997, conducts research, carries out preventive activities, provides 
assistance  to  victims,  and  prepares  reports  on  the  implementation  of  the  national  anti-
trafficking programme and issues recommendations for improving anti-trafficking policy. La 
Strada  Ukraine  operates  a  toll-free  telephone  hotline  for  victims  and  potential  victims  of 
trafficking. 

The  All-Ukrainian  Coalition  of  NGOs  for  Combating  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings, 
consisting  of  28  NGOs  from  different  parts  of  the  country,  carries  out  awareness-raising 
activities for the general public and target groups such as school children, students, people in 
areas  in  a  difficult  economic  situation,  migrant  workers,  etc.  They  also  provide  training  on 
trafficking to different professionals. 

The IOM office in Ukraine has been crucial to assisting victims of trafficking. Since 2000, it 
has  provided  direct  assistance  to  11 237  victims,  including  financial  support  and  legal  aid, 
medical  and  psychological  assistance,  counselling,  and  vocational  training.  The  office  also 
operates  a  Medical  Rehabilitation  Centre.  It  carries  out  awareness-raising  activities  with 
Ukrainian NGOs and other international organisations, and cooperates with law enforcement 
agencies on improving their capacity to investigate trafficking offences and to cooperate with 
other countries and developing an effective witness protection system. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Despite progress in counter-trafficking activities, the concerns expressed in the fifth progress 
report  remain.  The  low  number  of  registered  victims  is  a  concern.  There  is  a  need  for  the 
government to increase its efforts to identify victims of trafficking. 

(cid:190)  Implementation of legislation on preventing and fighting corruption, ensuring the 
efficient  functioning  of  the  independent  anti-corruption  agency;  development  of 
ethical codes and training on anti-corruption, especially targeting public officials 
involved in law enforcement and the judiciary 

The Government approved the State Anti-Corruption Strategy Programme Implementation for 
2014-2017 and it was published on the website of the Ministry of Justice. 

In September 2015, the President of Ukraine signed a decree approving the composition of the 
National Council for Anti-Corruption Policy and appointing the head of the Council. 

On  14 July 2015,  Parliament  adopted  amendments  to  several  laws  aiming  at  enhancing 
transparency of ownership, in particular as regards property registers, vehicles, and land plots. 
Under  the  law,  the  public  will  gain  access  to  information  about  the  owners  of  registered 
vehicles and real estate and complete information about the land plots contained in the State 
Land Cadastre. The law promotes public scrutiny of officials’ tax payments and contributes to 
openness  and  transparency  in  central  and  local  government.  The  law  came  into  effect  on 
6 October 2015. 

On  8 October 2015  Parliament  adopted  legislation  amending  some  laws  against  political 
corruption, introducing direct public funding for political parties and increased transparency 
of party funding from 2017. The law sets criteria for state funding, and legitimate expenditure. 
It also sets ceilings on annual contributions to political parties by businesses and individuals. 

Tangible results on anti-corruption reforms have yet to follow the setting up of anti-corruption 
institutions, which are either in the early stages of establishment or, if established, have not 
yet started to build a track record. In relation to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, good 
progress  was  achieved.  The  director  was  appointed  on  16 April 2015.  The  Director  of  the 
NABU is appointed and dismissed by the President of Ukraine according to the procedure laid 
down in the NABU Law. Parliament may dismiss the director on grounds expressly provided 
by the NABU Law. The NABU has entered into a number of agreements with other agencies 
including the fiscal service and the Security Service (SSU). The NABU is entitled under its 
statutes  to  access  all  the  databases  of  national  agencies,  which  are  required  to  respond  to 
requests for access within three days. 

Around 100 detectives have been appointed so far and training started on 7 September 2015. 
This is already enough staff to start investigations. 

There is another aspect of the NABU’s work that relates to the broad powers of the Security 
Service  of  Ukraine  (SSU).  In  the  Law  on  National  Security,  corruption  is  listed  among  the 
threats  to  state  security,  and  so  is  considered  a  matter  of  national  security  by  the  SSU. 
Amendments  proposed  to  Article  216  of  the  Criminal  Procedure  Code  will  delineate  the 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
powers of the different law enforcement agencies, including the SSU, which will have its pre-
trial investigation powers reduced. 

The  NABU  cannot  be  effective  in  its  work  without  the  specialised  anti-corruption 
prosecution  office.  The  independence  of  this  prosecution  office  is  key,  as  the  follow-up  of 
NABU’s  investigative  work  and  decisions  on  whether  to  take  a  case  to  court  fall  entirely 
within its remit. From the outset, however, the selection process gave rise to concerns about 
the  risk  of  political  influence,  the  lack  of  clear  and  objective  criteria  for  the  selection 
committee,  unclear  requirements  and  procedures,  and  overreliance  on  the  discretion  of  the 
Prosecutor  General,  which  appears  to  contradict  the  office’s  status  under  the  law,  i.e.  its 
independence and operational autonomy from the Prosecutor General.  

According  to  the  existing  procedures,  the  Prosecutor  General  appoints  four  members  of  the 
selection  committee,  while  Parliament  appoints  seven  members.  It  was  originally  intended 
that  the  four  prosecutors  to  sit  on  this  committee  should  be  chosen  by  the  Prosecutorial 
Council, but that body will not exist until the reform of public prosecution is complete. The 
selection  committee  started  work  on  21 September 2015;  however,  the  appointments  to  it, 
notably  those  of  the  Prosecutor  General,  were  met  with  distrust  from  the  public  and  civil 
society  in  terms  of  their  credibility,  integrity  and  reputation.  Currently  there  are  no  set 
eligibility  criteria  for  members  of  the  selection  committee.  On  6 November 2015,  two 
appointments to the selection committee were withdrawn by the Prosecutor General and the 
two members replaced, but concerns about the credibility of and trust in the process remained.  

On  30  November,  the  General  Prosecutor  appointed  the  head  of  the  specialised  anti-
corruption  office.  After  the  appointment  of  the  head  of  the  specialised  anti-corruption 
prosecution,  the  recruitment  process  of  the  specialised  anti-corruption  staff  must  be  merit-
based, competitive, transparent, integrity-based and independent. 

Overall,  the  shortcomings  in  the  selection  process  highlighted  the  need  for  ensuring  the 
credibility  of  this  institution  as  well  as  the  removal  of  political  influence  on  the  selection 
process. As a matter of priority, the independence and credibility of the selection committee 
should  be  ensured,  and  amendments  to  the  legislation  drafted  to  provide  by  early  2016 
effective independence safeguards for the appointment and dismissal of the leadership and the 
staff of the specialised anti-corruption prosecution office.  

The  reform  of  the  prosecutor’s  office  has  started.  The  aim  is  to  restructure  the  prosecution 
service in order to ensure higher standards of efficiency, results-oriented strategic approaches 
and high standards of integrity, along with effective prevention and prosecution. To this end, 
prosecutors  will  undergo  a  new  testing  process  to  determine  their  suitability,  skills  and 
knowledge  for  a  position.  External  candidates  may  also  apply.  The  total  number  of 
prosecutors  under  the  reformed  office  will  be  considerably  reduced.  The  figure  stood  at 
18 500 in 2013 and has now  fallen to  15 000; it will be  further reduced to  10 000 by  2017. 
This is partially enabled by removing the power of general supervision from the prosecutor’s 
office.  The  reform  also  aims  to  address  the  considerable  risks  of  corruption  and  challenges 
within prosecution offices. However, despite the commendable efforts of a number of reform-
minded players, there the necessary support and drive from the leadership of the Prosecutor 
General’s Office is still much needed to ensure continued implementation of the reform. 

With regard to asset recovery, the Ukrainian government envisaged an agency which would 
function as both an Asset Recovery Office (ARO) and Asset Management Office (AMO) and 
15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ensure  coordination  of  asset  recovery  work  between  all  relevant  agencies.  Ukraine  had 
committed  to  establishing  a  national  Asset  Recovery  Office,  which  would  also  have  the 
powers  and  capacity  to  manage  frozen  and  confiscated  assets,  and  to  undertake  further 
improvements  of  the  legislative  framework,  notably  by  addressing  existing  shortcomings 
which  made  freezing  and  confiscating  criminal  assets  cumbersome  and  ineffective.  The 
setting up of a multidisciplinary, independent agency working as both ARO and AMO is in 
line  with  the  standards  developed  in  the  EU,  where  many  AROs  have  a  multidisciplinary 
structure. The indicators of effectiveness for AROs used in the peer reviews between the EU 
Asset  Recovery  Offices  include  multidisciplinarity,  involvement  in  asset  management,  links 
with mutual legal assistance procedures and access to judicial statistics. 

On  10 November 2015,  Parliament  adopted  a  set  of  laws  aimed  at  improving  the  asset 
recovery framework. In the form proposed by the Government the draft laws aimed to set up 
an  Asset  Recovery  Office  which  would  also  cover  management  of  frozen  and  confiscated 
assets,  and  they  included  substantive  and  procedural  provisions  on  the  freezing  and 
confiscation process. The drafts aimed at improving Ukraine’s track record on asset recovery 
as  an  important  component  of  anti-corruption  policies.  There  are  particular  concerns  about 
amendments  that  seem  to  have  limited  the  Agency's  functions  of  active  management  of  the 
seized  assets  that  would  allow  increasing  the  economic  value  of  assets  during  freezing. 
Adequately  managing  any  kind  of  frozen  property  necessarily  implies  activities  that  go 
beyond  the  mere  storage  of  assets  to  impede  any  potential  loss  of  value.  The  provisions  on 
asset  management  submitted  by  the  Ukrainian  Government  were  more  specific  on  issues 
pertaining  to  management  of  assets.  In  the  newly  adopted  law,  the  purpose  of  the  asset 
management  function  appears  to  have  been  limited  from  "based  on  principles  of  efficiency, 
preservation and appreciation of the value" to "controlling the preservation of the value". This 
may for instance discourage in practice the seizure of assets. In order to preserve the value of 
assets,  specific  expertise  and  a  more  active  management  of  the  assets  would  be  required.  If 
these powers are not granted, it might prove very difficult for prosecutors and judges to freeze 
businesses. The provision in the law may also prevent the implementation of best practices, 
such  as  the  assignment  of  the  management  of  assets  to  its  employees,  which  continue  the 
managing until confiscation without losing their job.   

The  amendments  could  also  render  cumbersome  the  freezing  and  confiscation  of  assets 
transferred to third parties, which is a very common practice used by offenders, together with 
amendments which removed the management of frozen/seized and confiscated assets from the 
proposed  Asset  Recovery  Office.  Further,  the  freezing  regime  against  third  parties  of  the 
Criminal  Procedure  Code  falls  short  of  providing  judicial  remedies  and  safeguards  to 
guarantee the preservation of fundamental rights (right to property, right to a fair trial). The 
special confiscation regime against third parties should also cover the assets directly acquired 
by a third party following a criminal offense for which special confiscation applies.  

Several provisions fall short of the confiscation Directive (2014/42/EU) at the very least the 
provisions  enabling  confiscation  in  case  of  illness  or  absconding  of  the  suspect  or  accused 
persons,  the  provisions  on  extended  confiscation,  the  safeguards  and  the  provisions  on 
effective confiscation and execution.  

In  relation  to  preventing  corruption,  the  National  Agency  for  Prevention  of  Corruption 
(NAPC)  will  be  in  charge  of  designing  and  implementing  anti-corruption  programmes,  and 
checking  on  asset  declarations  and  conflicts  of  interest  for  public  officials.  The  Law  on 
Corruption Prevention defines the new agency as a central executive authority with a special 
16 

 
 
 
 
 
status under the Government. After a selection process which was re-run due to allegations of 
manipulation,  a  new  selection  committee  has  been  appointed.  The  five  members  of  the 
Selection  Board  are  expected  to  be  appointed  in  December  2015.  The  selection  and 
appointment  process  for  members  of  the  Agency  and  their  support  staff  should  include  
safeguards of their professional independence. 

As regards checks on asset declarations and conflicts of interest for holders of public office 
and managers of state owned/controlled companies, no progress has been made since the last 
VLAP report. These checks are the responsibility of the State Fiscal Service, but in practice 
they  are  not  being  conducted.  Once  established,  the  NAPC  will  take  over  this  task.  It  is 
nevertheless imperative to ensure that assets declared before that date and potential conflicts 
of interest before that date are also subject to scrutiny and followed up. 

The  web  portal  for  asset  declarations  is  being  developed  and  will  be  administered  by  the 
NAPC.  The  United  Nations  Development  Programme  (UNDP)  has  announced  a  tender  to 
select an IT company to develop the software for e-declaration systems. In the first stage the 
system will include only submission and publication of declarations; the verification module 
will be added by mid-2016. The verification mechanisms must include effective safeguards of 
independence and a system of deterrent sanctions should be put in place for unjustified wealth 
and conflicts of interest. 

A  draft  law  amending  certain  legal  acts  in  the  sphere  of  public  procurement,  to  align  them 
with  international  standards,  and  granting  additional  safeguards  to  fight  corruption,  was 
adopted  by  Parliament  on  15 September 2015.  It  is  intended  that  full  information  about 
contracts  will  be  made  public  as  soon  as  they  are  awarded.  Parliament  adopted  laws  on 
prevention  and  counteraction  of  political  corruption  and  funding  of  political  parties  on 
8 October 2015. 

The issue of immunity for judges, prosecutors and MPs is unchanged since the last report. 

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  the  strategy  and  action  plan  for  the  prevention  of  money 
laundering  and  financing  of  terrorism,  implementation  of  the  law  on  the 
prevention  of  financing  of  terrorism,  implementation  of  relevant  legislation  on 
confiscation  of  assets  of  criminals  (including  the  provisions  addressing  cross-
border aspects) 

As highlighted in the fifth progress report, the 2014 ‘Law on prevention and counteraction to 
legalisation (money laundering) of the proceeds from crime or terrorism financing, as well as 
financing  of  the  proliferation  of  weapons  of  mass  destruction’,  which  came  into  effect  on 
7 February 2015  brought  Ukraine  closer  to  the  international  standards  on  combating  money 
laundering and terrorism financing. The new law has been published with a commentary and 
translated into English with the support of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in 
Europe (OSCE). This can be seen as an instrument to facilitate international cooperation. 

The  non-disclosure  of  ultimate  beneficial  ownership  by  banks  to  the  National  Bank  was 
highlighted  as  an  area  of  concern  in  March  2015.  As  of  October  2015,  132  out  of  135 
commercial  banks  had  disclosed  their  ultimate  beneficial  ownership,  in  line  with  new 
regulations.  Checks  on  the  accuracy  of  the  information  provided  by  22  banks  are  ongoing. 
The  relevant  information  is  regularly  published  on  the  official  National  Bank  of  Ukraine 
website. 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Despite the new law, increasing numbers of suspicious transaction reports are coming into the 
Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU); it does initially freeze large amounts, but the value of assets 
then  confiscated  and  the  number  of  court  cases  ending  in  confiscation  of  the  proceeds  of 
crime remains low. 

On 2 September 2015, a new unit was created in the Department of Supervision in Criminal 
Proceedings of the Prosecutor General’s Office and specialised prosecutors were appointed at 
regional  level.  The  unit  is  tasked  with  coordinating  investigations  in  cases  of  money 
laundering and terrorism financing. 

As  new  technologies  are  evolving  fast,  it  is  important  to  stay  up-to-date  (a)  to  prevent  new 
instruments  from  being  used/abused  for  money  laundering,  and  (b)  to  include  new 
technologies  in  national  law/regulation.  All  online  services  (not  registered  as  banks  or 
financial institutions) that do not have client identification or monitor the origin of the money 
must be seen as a risk. Client identification is not only needed to prevent money laundering 
but to prevent corruption. The National Bank of Ukraine is making efforts to try to regulate 
payment systems that are not offered by banks. It maintains a register of payments systems, 
settlement systems, participants in these systems and payment infrastructure service providers 
and  it  regulates  payment  systems  set  up  by  banks  and  non-banking  institutions.  It  also 
cooperates with law enforcement authorities to ensure that payment systems that are not in the 
NBU Register comply with the legislation. 

Since  March  2015,  the  Government  has  introduced  35  new  anti-money  laundering 
regulations. These cover: 

•  aspects  of  the  Unified  Information  System  for  preventing  and  counteracting  the 
legalisation  (laundering)  of  illegally  derived  income,  financing  terrorism,  and 
financing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (Resolution of the Cabinet of 
Ministers, 14.05.2015 No 299); 

• 

• 

the  procedure  for  the  submission  of  undertakings,  businesses  institutions  and 
organisations that are not the subjects of primary financial monitoring information at 
the  request  of  the  State  Financial  Monitoring  Service  of  Ukraine  (Resolution  of  the 
Cabinet of Ministers, 17.06.2015 No 411);         

the procedure for determining States (territories) that do not fulfil or improperly fulfil 
recommendations  of  international,  inter-governmental  organisations  operating  in  the 
sphere  of  preventing  and  counteracting  the  legalisation  (laundering)  of  illegally 
derived  income,  financing  terrorism,  and  financing  proliferation  of  weapons  of  mass 
destruction (Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers, 17.07.2015 No 510); 

• 

regulations  on  the  State  Financial  Monitoring  Service  (Resolution  of  the  Cabinet  of 
Ministers, 29.07.2015 No 537); 

•  some aspects of the organisation of financial monitoring (Resolution of the Cabinet of 

Ministers, 05.08.2015 No 552); 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
• 

• 

• 

• 

regulations  on  the  organisation  and  coordination  of  retraining  and  professional 
development  of  specialists  in  financial  monitoring  (Resolution  of  the  Cabinet  of 
Ministers, 19.08.2015 No 610); 

the procedure for granting state agencies, state registrars permission to request initial 
financial  monitoring  of  entity  customer  information  (Resolution  of  the  Cabinet  of 
Ministers, 08.09.2015 No 693); 

the issue of organisation national risk assessment legalisation (laundering) of proceeds 
from crime and terrorist financing (Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers, 16.09.2015 
No 717); 

the  procedure  for  granting  state  agencies  and  local  governments,  state  registrar 
information  on  financial  transactions  and  their  participants  to  the  State  Financial 
Monitoring Service (Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers, 16.09.2015 No 708). 

The  FIU  received  more  than  1  million  transaction  reports  in  2014.  Transactions  of 
UAH 150 000 or more must be reported to the FIU in accordance with the 2014 anti-money 
laundering  law.  The  figures  and  trend  are  unchanged  in  2015.  Banks  (and  financial 
institutions  in  a  broader  sense)  are  the  largest  group  reporting  to  the  FIU.  It  remains  a 
challenge to motivate other reporting entities to report any suspicion of money laundering. 

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  the  national  anti-drug  strategy  and  action  plan,  ensuring 
adequate working of the Inter-Agency Coordination Council on Combating Drug 
Abuse, making the information on drug seizures and persons involved accessible 
at  border  crossing  points,  and  further  developing  cooperation  and  information 
exchange  with  relevant  international  bodies  in  the  drug  field;  establishing 
cooperation with the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction 

The Cabinet of Ministers approved Action Plan for 2015 for the implementation Strategy of 
Drug Policy to 2020 on 25 March 2015. Work has begun on a draft action plan for the next 
period.  The  line  ministries  considered  consolidating  provisions  regulating  drugs  issues  in  a 
single legal instrument, for instance a Drugs Code, and believe that Ukraine’s legislation on 
drugs is harmonised and provides a coherent state policy. In particular, state policy is shaped 
by: 

• 
• 

the Law on Drugs, Psychotropic Substances and Precursors; 
the  Law  on  Measures  to  Counteract  Illicit  Circulation  of  Drugs,  Psychotropic 
Substances and Precursors, and their Abuse 

•  Article 44 of the Code on Administrative Misdemeanours 
•  Articles 305-321 of the Criminal Code; 
• 

the strategy on state drug policy for the period to 2020. 

The Ministry of Health cooperates with other drug policy institutions which implement state 
policy on drugs control by means of regular exchanges of information on drug situation in the 
country,  improvements  in  data  collection  methods  concerning  the  emergence  of  new 
psychoactive  substances,  and  preparation  of  joint  reports  on  narcotic  drugs,  psychotropic 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
substances and precursors, on counteracting illicit trafficking, and on trends and developments 
in this field for international institutions. 

In  the  first  seven  months  of  2015,  police  reported  16 500  criminal  offences  in  the  narcotics 
sphere. Further efforts should be made to tackle the low level of seizures. 

Since  2011,  annual  reports  have  been  submitted  by  the  Monitoring  and  Medical  Centre  on 
Drugs  and  Alcohol  (UMMCDA)  to  the  European  Monitoring  Centre  for  Drugs  and  Drugs 
Addictions. 

2.3.2.  Judicial cooperation in criminal matters 

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  international  conventions  concerning  judicial  cooperation  in 

criminal matters (in particular Council of Europe Conventions); 

(cid:190)  High  level  of  effectiveness  of  judicial  cooperation  in  criminal  matters  of  judges 

and prosecutors with the EU Member States. 

The cooperation agreement between Ukraine and Eurojust is awaiting signature pending the 
outcome of the consultation of the European Parliament expected in late December 2015. 

The  judicial  cooperation  in  criminal  matters  benchmark  was  already  deemed  to  have 
been achieved in the fifth progress report.  

2.4.3. LAW ENFORCEMENT COOPERATION   

(cid:190)  High  level  of  operational  and  special  investigative  capacity  of  law  enforcement 

services and its consistent and efficient use to tackle cross-border crime 

The  national  security  strategy,  approved  on  26 May 2015  by  the  President,  envisages  the 
transfer of most law enforcement functions, except fighting crimes against national security, 
from the Security Service of Ukraine to other law enforcement agencies. 

As of 7 November 2015 the Ministry of the Internal Affairs was to focus on policymaking on 
internal affairs and directing the activities of other agencies (the National Police, the National 
Guard,  the  State  Border  Guard  Service,  the  State  Migration  Service  and  State  Emergency 
Service). The latter become functionally independent executive bodies. 

The  Law  on  the  National  Police  entered  into  force  on  7 November 2015.  Accordingly,  the 
police,  among  others,  will  work  on  combating  crime,  particularly  organised  crime,  and 
ensuring  public  safety.  The  law  envisages  the  optimisation  of  the  National  Police,  a  clear 
separation  of  structural  units’  powers,  elimination  of  duplicate  functions,  and  new 
departments:  patrol  police  and  special  purpose  police  (CORD  —  the  operational  and 
immediate  action  corps).  The  new  approach  to  recruitment  and  career  development,  which 
envisages open competition for applicants, a contract and promotions based on the individual 
achievements  of  each  employee,  will  make  it  possible  to  form  professionals  and  match  the 
best practice of EU countries. The Law establishes a clear framework for the use of force by 
police and provides a list of special means and the reasons for their application, which meets 
international standards of policing. The police may use force only on the grounds provided by 
this law. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In  view  of  the  current  reform,  which  envisages  the  transfer  of  powers  between  law 
enforcement institutions and new ones being established, the effectiveness of law enforcement 
services still needs to be further pursued. 

(cid:190)  High cooperation among relevant national agencies — especially border guards, 

police, customs officers, as well as cooperation with the judicial authorities 

Inter-agency  cooperation  continues  to  be  considered  satisfactory  but  is  still  subject  to 
important improvements, which would contribute to the effectiveness of investigations. 

The  main  forms  of  interaction  between  law  enforcement  agencies  are  working  meetings; 
information  exchange  and  joint  (coordinated)  actions.  Cooperation  between  investigative 
units is governed by the Criminal Procedure Code. Article 38 (pre-trial investigation) of the 
Code provides for pre-trial investigation by investigation group. As the prosecution exercises 
procedure  management  of  a  pre-trial  investigation  in  criminal  proceedings,  including 
corruption  cases,  it  is  possible  to  create  joint  investigative  teams  with  its  agreement.  The 
SBGS now has access to the Interpol database at border crossing points and this is welcome 
progress which will contribute to tackling cross-border crime. 

(cid:190)  Strengthened  regional 

law  enforcement  cooperation  and  bilateral  and 
multilateral  operational  cooperation  agreements,  including  by  sharing  on  time 
relevant information with competent law enforcement authorities of EU Member 
States. 

Ukrainian  law  enforcement  bodies  engage  in  international  cooperation  through  Interpol  and 
Europol channels for the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences. 

The exchange of information is also carried out through Interpol channels. A Department of 
the Ministry of Internal Affairs acts as the Ukrainian bureau of Interpol. In addition, there are 
units  of  Interpol  in  all  major  departments,  and  there  are  departments  of  the  Ministry  of 
Internal  Affairs  in  Kiev  and  the  regions.  Information  is  exchanged  via  a  system  of  query-
response. From January to August 2015,  33 609 queries were processed, comprising 14 868 
requests from the law enforcement agencies of Ukraine and 18 741 from the law enforcement 
agencies of foreign countries. 

Information is also exchanged through the national contact point for emergency assistance in 
the  investigation  of  cybercrimes,  which  is  based  in  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs’ 
Department  for  Combating  Cybercrime.  Since  the  beginning  of  2015,  62  requests  from  law 
enforcement agencies of other countries had been received. Of these, 17 had been worked out, 
aiming  to  obtain  information  on  fighting  cybercrime  and  helping  other  Ministry  of  Internal 
Affairs  departments  to  obtain  relevant  information.  47  requests  had  been  sent,  38  responses 
had been received. 

The procedure for the conclusion of the Europol operational agreement is very advanced. On 
4 June 2015  Parliament  adopted  a  law  ratifying  a  Memorandum  of  Understanding  between 
Ukraine  and  Europol  on  establishing  a  secure  communication  channel;  the  law  came  into 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
force on 13 July 2015. Currently the Ukrainian Bureau of Interpol is conducting negotiations 
with Europol to start work on setting up the SIENA secure communication channel. 

2.3.4.  Data protection 

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  the  law  on  the  protection  of  personal  data  and  ensuring 
efficient functioning of the independent data supervisory authority also through 
the allocation of the necessary financial and human resources 

Giving  responsibility  for  oversight  of  the  data  protection  law  to  the  Ombudsman  meets  the 
necessary  requirement  that  there  should  be  an  independent  supervisory  authority.  One 
potential concern about placing this responsibility within an organisation that has a number of 
other functions is that the structural arrangements might dilute the focus on data protection. 
However,  that  does  not  seem  to  be  the  case. The  Data  Protection  Department  that  has  been 
established  in  the  Ombudsman’s  Office  has  no  duties  other  than  data  protection,  and  it 
pursues those with vigour, commitment and a good understanding of a complex topic. 

The  budget  of  the  Ombudsman’s  Secretariat  was  increased  by  UAH  7  million  (25 %), 
allocated to three areas: the Data Protection Department, the Non-Discrimination Unit and the 
Unit for Access to Public Information. 

Further to the budget increase, the staff of the Data Protection Department was increased to 
23.  In  October  2015,  the  Department  recruited  a  new  staff  member  and  launched  a 
competition in order to fill the remaining vacant posts. In addition to the staff working full-
time  on  data  protection,  the  Department  is  able  to  draw  on  support  from  other  parts  of  the 
Ombudsman’s Office. For example, the Department employs no IT specialist. However, when 
technical  expertise  is  needed,  for  example  when  on-site  inspections  of  data  controllers  are 
carried out, the Department is assisted by the Ombudsman’s IT specialists. 

2.4 Block 4: External Relations and Fundamental Rights 

2.4.1 Freedom of movement within Ukraine 

•  Ensuring  that  freedom  of  movement  within  Ukraine  of  Ukrainian  citizens  and 
legally  staying  foreigners  or  stateless  persons  is  not  subject  to  unjustified 
restrictions, including measures of a discriminatory nature, based on any ground 
such  as  sex,  race,  colour,  ethnic  or  social  origin,  genetic  features,  language, 
religion  or  belief,  political  or  any  other  opinion,  membership  of  a  national 
minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation 

•  Providing  accessible  information  on  registration  requirements  to  foreigners 
wishing to reside in Ukraine, and ensure equal and transparent implementation 
of respective legislation 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  Ministry  of  Health  of  Ukraine  issued  an  order  (No  329)  on  11  June  2015,  excluding 
HIV/AIDS infection from the list of contagious diseases (order No 415 of 19.10.2001), which 
had served as the basis for refusing immigration permits.  

Ukrainian authorities have progressively improved the application of the legal framework for 
the  access  to  and  from  the  territories  not  under  government  control  (TNGC)  and  have 
introduced  measures  simplifying  the  crossing  of  the  contact  line.  After  consulting  interest 
groups, two new sets of orders were issued in June and September to this effect (Cabinet of 
Ministers  Resolution  No  367  of  4  June  2015  as  amended  by  Resolution  No  722  of  16 
September  2015;  State  Security  Service  Antiterrorist  Centre  Order  No  415  of  12  June  as 
amended by decree No 810 of 15 September 2015). 

Concerning the TNGC in certain areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions, a web-portal for 
applying for and receiving permits online, launched by the Government of Ukraine on 7 July, 
significantly  simplifies  the  procedure  for  civilians  and  reduces  the  potential  for  abuse  and 
corruption at the check points. In parallel, there is an alternative procedure for people without 
internet  access.  The  closed  list  of  grounds  for  entering/leaving  the  TNGC  was  expanded  to 
cover  grounds  such  as  work,  studies  and  healthcare.  Detailed  rules  for  refusing  to  issue  a 
permit were introduced. On the ground, all security guards must have their license on them. If 
a checkpoint is closed in one sector, another one can be used. Following the tragic incident in 
Volnovakha,  public  transport  was  forbidden.  In  the  period  from  July  to  September  2015, 
362 100 online requests were processed, out of which 9 000 were rejected, mainly due to the 
incorrect  filling  of  the  form  according  to  the  Ukrainian  authorities.  NGOs  reported  some 
incidents,  including  corruption  and  difficulties  in  crossing  the  check  points.  Queues  at 
checkpoints  were  reported  to  be  long.  For  the  access  to  Crimea/Sevastopol,  the  grounds  for 
entry were expanded; crossing by children was regulated well in detail. Work is under way on 
simplifying  the  acquisition  of  birth  and  death  certificates.  The  Ukrainian  authorities  should 
continue  to  monitor  the  situation  in  close  cooperation  with  civil  society  and  the 
Ombudsperson and to address the needs on the ground while respecting fundamental rights. 

2.4.3 Citizens’ rights, including protection of minorities 

•  Effective implementation of legislation and policies on anti-discrimination, 

implementation of relevant UN and Council of Europe instruments. 

Ukraine  demonstrated  a  strategic  approach  to  developing  the  administrative  capacity  of  the 
equality  institution  (the  Ombudsperson's  Office),  the  key  institution  dealing  with  the 
prevention  of  and  the  fight  against  discrimination.  The  number  of  staff  has  been  increased 
since the 5th progress report by more than 100%; another 9 posts were created, bringing the 
total to 15 positions in three units. Training courses were held for the newly recruited officers. 
In addition, the institution put in place a network of experts at the regional level which allows 
better coverage of the country. The budget of the equality institution was altogether increased 
by  UAH  7  million  (25%)  and  the  outlook  for  the  2016  budget  is  good,  according  to  the 
equality institution. 

With the amended Law on non-discrimination having entered into force in 2014, the available 
data on anti-discrimination case law shows that there are complaints and legal proceedings. . 
However,  the  implementation  and  enforcement  of  the  legal  framework  shows  that  further 
23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
improvement of the legislation would be needed to address in particular the protection of the 
victimisation; effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions and derogations (occupational 
requirement) in line with international standards. The Ministry of Justice included these needs 
in  the  draft  action  plan  on  the  implementation  of  the  national  human  rights  strategy. 
Amendments to redress these gaps were drafted. 

As  mentioned  in  the  fifth  progress  report,  the  Ukrainian  government  committed  in  2014  to 
explicitly prohibiting in its upcoming reform of the Labour Code discrimination on grounds of 
sexual orientation. On 12 November, Rada adopted draft law No 3442 of 10.11.2015, which 
amended  the  current  Labour  Code  to  explicitly  prohibit  the  discrimination  on  the  basis  of 
sexual orientation. The legislation was signed by the President on 21 November and entered into 
force on 27 November. A draft new Labour Code was adopted in the first reading, it did not yet 
include  such  explicit  prohibition.  The  timing  of  the  second  reading  is  not  known.  From 
January  to  August  2015,  the  NGO  Nash  Mir  Centre  documented  34  cases  of  incidents  and 
crimes motivated by homophobia. The number of acts against LGBT people increased. 

Ukraine continued to implement at a reasonable level the legal framework on the protection of 
persons  belonging  to  national  minorities.  Consultations  of  national  minorities  were  held  in 
decisions  at  central  and  local  level  on  issues  that  might  affect  their  rights.  In  this  context, 
attention  should  be  paid  to  national  minorities'  concerns  about  the  possible  impact  of  the 
process of decentralisation on their rights. Data on national minorities were collected. Given 
budgetary  constraints,  reasonable  resources  for  implementation  of  the  rights  of  national 
minorities were allocated. At the moment of writing of this report, the draft action plan on the 
implementation of the national human rights strategy encompassed measures concerning the 
protection  of  rights  of  national  minorities.  This  included  additional  classes  of  Ukrainian 
language for pupils studying in national minority languages, which would help them pass the 
baccalaureate exam.  A dialogue should be maintained between the Ukrainian authorities and 
representatives of persons belonging to national minorities in order to address their concerns. 

•  Effective implementation of the Action Plan on fight against discrimination; 

general awareness raising campaigns against racism, xenophobia, anti-semitism 
and other forms of discrimination; strengthening the responsible bodies for 
antidiscrimination policy and combating racism, xenophobia and anti-semitism. 

The equality institution continued to be dynamic in performing its anti-discrimination duties, 
in close cooperation with civil society and international organisations, and to implement the 
strategy on preventing and combating discrimination in Ukraine 2014-2017 and the relevant 
action  plan:  Between  1  January  and  8  September  2015,  the  institution  considered  314 
complaints  on  discrimination  on  the  basis  of  different  grounds  including  the  ethnic  origin, 
religion, disability and sexual orientation. Furthermore, the body initiated 39 proceedings with 
respect  to  hate  crime,  hate  speech  and  discrimination.  Lawyers,  judges,  Roma  youth  and 
Roma  rights  activists,  representatives  of  ethnic  minorities,  public  servants  and  law 
enforcement  officials  received  training  on  anti-discrimination  provided  by  the  equality 
institution. Since it is expected that the anti-discrimination agenda will gradually continue to 
develop,  the  allocation  of  financial  and  human  resources  should  progressively  continue  to 
ensure the compliance of the equality institution with its legal duties. 

The  equality  institution  is  actively  raising  awareness  against  discrimination.  It  launched  a 
campaign  'Discrimination  restricts,  Counterac'  through  different  media  (website,  social 
24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
networks, video clips). In addition, it issued publications on different, relevant topics targeting 
different  groups,  e.g.  a  handbook  for  trainers  'How  to  teach  non-discrimination';  'Gaps  in 
preventing, documenting, investigating and prosecuting hate crimes in Ukraine'; 'State Policy 
toward Roma: report on the state of implementation'; 'Human Rights of Roma'. The institution 
also  issued  a  recommendation  for  lawyers  on  how  to  develop  effective  arguments  in 
discrimination cases and a recommendation on investigation of hate crimes. 

Relevant  ministries  launched  campaigns and activities to inform citizens and  officials about 
anti-discrimination:  e.g.  a  campaign  on  empowering  women  in  local  elections  and  a  special 
training for representatives of the executive and legislative branch on the needs of IDPs, both 
by the Ministry for Social Policy (MSP). A special section 'Combating discrimination' on the 
MSP official website covers relevant national and international legislation. Due to budgetary 
constraints,  most  awareness-raising  campaigns  continued  to  be  financed  by  international 
donors  through  projects  developed  by  NGOs,  in  some  cases  in  cooperation  with  public 
authorities. 

The President adopted the national human rights strategy on 25 August 2015 by decree (No 
501/2015).  Preventing  and  combating  discrimination  is  one  of  the  strategy's  guiding 
principles. Prevention of and the fight against discrimination is also dealt with as one of the 
strategic areas for public action. The document sets strategic goals for an efficient system of 
preventing  and  combating  discrimination  and  the  expected  outcomes,  including  awareness-
raising programmes, positive actions at national and local level and efficient investigation of 
discrimination.  Furthermore,  it  has  special  chapters  on  issues  such  as  ensuring  the  rights  of 
national  minorities  and  indigenous  people,  protecting  the  rights  of  internally  displaced 
persons  and  preventing  and  combating  discrimination  between  women  and  men. 
Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and protection of the Roma population are 
not addressed. 

In line with the presidential decree, the Cabinet of Ministers, in close cooperation with civil 
society  and  international  organisations,  elaborated  the  2020  action  plan  to  implement  the 
national human rights strategy of Ukraine and adopted it on 23 November. At the moment of 
writing of this report, it was not made public. The latest available draft version of the Action 
Plan covered among others actions related to the Roma community and LGBT people.. The 
presidential  decree  tasked  to  allocate  funds  for  financing  the  implementation  of  the  action 
plan and to present a report on its implementation by 1 November each year. 

•  Provision of specific training to law enforcement officials, prosecutors and judges 

potentially involved in the prosecution of hate crimes. 

Significant  progress  was  made  on  ensuring  a  more  systematic  and  permanent  approach  to 
training  on  anti-discrimination.  The  National  School  of  Judges  in  Ukraine,  the  National 
Academy of Prosecutors and the Policy Academy amended their training curricula to this end. 
The tests for candidate judges, current judges as well as those aspiring to obtain management 
positions,  and  the  tests  for  prosecutors  include  topics  on  the  prevention  and  sanctioning  of 
discrimination.  Experts  from  NGOs  trained  the  new  patrol  police  on  anti-discrimination 
issues, human rights and the rights of national minorities. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ASSESSMENT OF MIGRATORY AND SECURITY IMPACTS 
UKRAINE 

1. INTRODUCTION  

1.1. Background 

Under  the  visa  liberalisation  action  plan  (VLAP)  methodology,  the  Commission  committed 
itself to assessing the potential migratory and security impacts of future visa liberalisation for 
Ukrainian citizens travelling to the Schengen area.3 This had to be done before Ukraine moves 
to the second phase of the VLAP.  

In the Commission's fourth report on Ukraine's implementation of the action plan (adopted in 
May 2014,4 concluding that Ukraine had met the first phase benchmarks), it took the view that 
the  exceptional  emergency  situation  in  eastern  Ukraine  meant  that  issuing  an  assessment  at 
that time would be of limited value.   

Once Ukraine started the second phase of its VLAP, the Commission provided an assessment 
of the possible consequences of Ukrainian nationals travelling to the Schengen area without 
visa  restrictions.  It  published  the  results  in  the  Commission  staff  working  document 
accompanying  the  fifth  progress  report  on  Ukraine's  implementation  of  the  action  plan, 
adopted in May 2015.5 

1.2. Methodology 

This document updates the most recent assessment published in May 2015. This assessment is 
based on information provided by EU Agencies and the EU Border Assistance Mission to the 
Republic of Moldova and Ukraine (EUBAM). This document also draws on a combination of 
official Ukrainian and international organisation sources, and Eurostat data. Given the current 
crisis in and around Ukraine, it has been difficult to obtain reliable data for the territories not 
under effective control of the Government. 

This  update  on  the  assessment  of  impact  aims  to  identify  new  possible  phenomena  and 
emerging trends in the areas of migration, mobility and security in relation to Ukraine and the 
possible impact of a visa-free regime for the EU and the Schengen area.   

This  assessment  reflects  the  state  of  play  as  of  October  2015  and  therefore  provides  only  a 
snapshot  of  the  situation.  This  assessment  does  not  constitute  a  benchmark  of  the  VLAP. 
Nevertheless,  this  assessment  also  list  below  some  measures  the  Ukrainian  authorities  have 
taken  while  implementing  the  visa  liberalisation  action  plan  to  address  the  prospective 
migration  and  security  issues  identified  by  the  assessment  of  impacts.    In  the  conclusion  of 
this document we also provide some possible measures that EU Member States could take to 
reduce migration and security risks.  

3 The visa waiver would apply to the Schengen area including: EU Schengen States, EU Member States who do 
not yet fully apply the Schengen acquis and non-EU Schengen States. 
4 COM (2014) 336. 
5 SWD (2015) 104. 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
2. ASSESSMENT OF MIGRATORY IMPACTS 

2.1.  Regular  and  irregular  migration:  trends  and  possible  consequences  of  a  visa-free 
travel 

2.1.1. General overview 

According  to  the  International  Organisation  for  Migration  (IOM),  70  %  of  labour  migrants 
from Ukraine are male and aged between 20 and 49. Men work mainly in manual labour (such 
as  construction  and  agriculture),  while  women  tend  to  be  domestic  or  seasonal  agricultural 
workers.  The  conflict  in  eastern  Ukraine,  the  sharp  devaluation  of  the  Ukrainian  currency, 
growing  inflation  and  falls  in  workers'  real  wages  are  inevitably  causing  Ukrainians'  living 
conditions  to  deteriorate.  As  the  situation  on  the  Ukrainian  job  market  remains  difficult, 
working abroad remains an attractive option for many would-be migrants. Furthermore, with 
16  %  of  the  population  aged  under  15  in  2013,6  Ukraine  will  have  to  provide  inclusive 
economic opportunities in the near future to avoid large emigration flows. Available figures 
on  unemployment  in  Ukraine  indicate  very low  annual  rates  ranging between  6  %  and  9  % 
since 2004. However, figures on monthly gross wages indicate a very low level of earnings. 
The differences between wages in Ukraine and many of its neighbouring countries in the EU 
are therefore the most likely reason for Ukrainians to leave their home country and seek work 
abroad.  

Ukrainian labour migrants can be found all over the world. The Russian Federation remains 
one of the main destination countries for Ukrainian labour migrants with an estimated number 
of  3.6  million  Ukrainians,  although  for  economic  reasons  it  is  currently  losing  its  appeal. 
Other  labour  migrants  opt  for  EU  Member  States  and,  to  a  lesser  extent,  Canada,  the  USA, 
Turkey, Israel and Belarus.   

Ukraine  is  located  in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  EU  countries,  and  has  a  land  border 
with  Poland,  Slovakia,  Hungary  and  Romania,  making  travel  to  the  EU  relatively 
straightforward  and  affordable.  Travel  flows  and  cultural,  political,  linguistic  and  economic 
links with the EU result in large migratory movements between Ukraine and neighbouring EU 
Member  States.  Other  Member  States  such  as  Italy  and  Germany  are  also  attractive 
destinations  for  Ukrainians  labour  migrants.  A  number  of  airlines  provide  direct  flight 
connections from Kiev to various destinations across Europe.  

According to Frontex (the European agency for the management of operational cooperation at 
the  external  borders  of  the  European  Union),  Ukrainian's  migration  preferences  depend  on 
which  part  of  the  country  they  come  from:    western  Ukraine  prefer  Poland  and  other  EU 
Member States, while people from central and eastern Ukraine prefer the Russian Federation 
for cultural and linguistic reasons. The Zakarpatia region in the far west of Ukraine has the 
highest  proportion  of  labour  migrants.  People  from  this  region  prefer  to  migrate  to  Czech 
Republic, Hungary and Slovakia due to language similarities.  

6 IOM – www.iom.int - Ukraine country profile. 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
2.1.2. Regular migration facts 

The  data  available  for  2014  confirm  that  Ukrainians  are  spread  across  Europe  and  not 
clustered in the EU States neighbouring Ukraine.  

Eurostat  data  suggest  that  in  2013  there  were  over  850  000  Ukrainian  nationals  legally 
residing  in  the  EU.  Of  these,  750  000  were  in  the  five  EU  countries  that  host  the  largest 
Ukrainian  diaspora  populations,  namely  Italy,  Poland,  Germany,  the  Czech  Republic  and 
Spain.  

In  2014,  Ukrainian  nationals  were  mainly  registered  in  Italy  (236  346),  Poland  (210  402), 
Germany (111 650), the Czech Republic (110 712), Spain (82 726) and Portugal (37 849).  

The  data  also  show  a  substantial  increase  between  2011  and  2014  in  the  number  of  valid 
residence permits held by Ukrainian citizens in the EU Member States and Schengen area as a 
whole, corresponding to a growing interest among Ukrainians for the EU. Poland recorded the 
largest increase in valid residence permits held by Ukrainians.  

Table  1:  All  valid  residence  permits  by  reason,  length  of  validity  and  citizenship 
(Ukrainians), 2011-2014 

EU Member States and Schengen area 
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany  
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 

2011 
756 289
3 613
773
119 083
6 259
112 016
5 909
3 076
20 182
76 180
7 478
NA
223 790
5 080
3 380
2 801
387
19 221
215
2 898
5 338
76 162
48 022
1 409
1 460
5 515

28 

2012 
782 712
3 745
900
103 165
6 573
111 747
6 025
2 609
18 477
78 214
8 009
NA
224 681
NA
3 641
3 239
499
13 802
235
2 796
5 930
122 274
44 079
1 317
1 501
6 193

2013 
849 946 
3 850 
1 072 
107 254 
7 045 
109 781 
5 994 
1 959 
18 487 
80 866 
8 524 
247 
233 604 
2 775 
3 931 
3 714 
513 
13 149 
395 
2 651 
6 453 
175 656 
41 090 
1 401 
1 565 
6 361 

2014 

NA
3 853
2 623
110 712
7 909
111 650
6 649
1 624
NA
82 726
9 294
262
236 346
2 842
4 747
5 277
562
NA
570
NA
NA
210 402
37 849
1 574
1 728
7 450

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 09.10.15, extracted on 13.1.2015 

2 454
2 946
NA
154
NA
1,706
NA

2 678
3 267
6 311
162
NA
1 803
5 828

1 782 
3 531 
6 296 
163 
48 
1 845 
6 147 

3 157
3 465
6 569
NA
46
1 821
6 319

The  main  pull  factors  for  Ukrainians  going  to  Poland,  Italy,  Germany,  Sweden  and  Czech 
Republic  are  better  working  conditions  compared  with  Ukraine  and  the  Russian  Federation. 
At  the  same  time,  factors  attracting  Ukrainian  migrants  to  Italy,  Spain  or  Portugal  include 
higher wages, frequent regularisation programmes and the presence of a large diaspora.  

As  the  data  in  Table  2  suggest,  the  number  of  Ukrainian  citizens  receiving  valid  residence 
permits in the EU increased from 166 950 in 2010 to more than 300 000 in 2014. Demand for 
residence  permits  in  all  other  EU  Member  States  apart  from  Poland  was  roughly  stable  in 
2014:  there  was  a  decrease  in  the  Czech  Republic,  Italy  and  UK;  in  contrast  with  growing 
interest in Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Denmark, Sweden and Finland. The overall 
increase  in  the  numbers  of  residence  permit  is  overwhelmingly  due  to  a  sharp  rise  in  the 
number  of  first  permits  issued  in  Poland.  Indeed,  Poland  issued  the  highest  number  of 
residence permits in 2014 at 247 397, accounting for almost 82 % of the permits.  

Table 2: First residence permits by reason, length of validity and citizenship (Ukraine), 
2009-2014 

EU Member States and 
Schengen area 
European Union (28 
countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany  
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

2014 

87 740
647
250
7 945
3 174
3 294
595
378
798
5 112
1 008
NA
39 640
983
378
366
81
2 829
63

166 950
760
249
13 679
2 604
3 288
252
211
964
3 857
1 067
NA
48 249
897
267
222
43
2 681
55

29 

125 754
681
297
5 521
2 287
3 179
645
211
821
4 413
1 152
NA
15 409
752
466
409
60
2 104
58

160 222
599
398
18 152
2 181
4 548
403
208
742
3 687
1 241
NA
8 493
611
733
773
60
1 119
78

236 472  302 772
518
598
12 867
2 603
6 163
853
265
836
3 595
1 577
98
8 761
779
1 316
2 053
89
1 164
306

518 
476 
18 622 
2 341 
4 838 
440 
252 
885 
3 637 
1 429 
67 
13 996 
576 
678 
873 
59 
930 
126 

 
 
 
 
 
 
632
Netherlands 
1 053
Austria 
104 730
Poland 
1 517
Portugal 
309
Romania 
181
Slovenia 
782
Slovakia 
866
Finland 
1 412
Sweden 
4 714
United Kingdom 
29
Iceland 
NA
Liechtenstein 
778
Norway 
Switzerland 
1 133
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 12.10.15, extracted on 13.10.2015 

508
832
76 485
2 064
257
209
969
658
1 348
4 275
20
NA
687
NA

603
903
75 168
1 789
214
262
686
813
1 459
5 392
31
NA
873
NA

505
700
8 447
2 409
294
221
1 356
600
1 908
3 759
24
NA
822
NA

879 
903 

938
936
171 769  247 397
1 038
339
258
1 592
1 119
1 322
3 392
NA
14
840
743

1 126 
254 
175 
1 040 
938 
1 192 
7 453 
32 
19 
787 
1 499 

The Polish-Ukrainian land border and local border traffic agreements 

Regular  passenger  flows  at  EU's  eastern  land  border  with  Ukraine  tend  to  be  fairly  large, 
despite the current visa obligation. Poland has a specific role due to its geographical position 
and  registers  many  Ukrainians  going  to  Poland  for  shopping  on  daytrips.  According  to 
Frontex, there were over 4.7 million border crossings recorded in the first half of 2015 at the 
border between Poland and Ukraine (on entry to Poland). The Polish-Ukrainian border section 
remained by far the busiest section of the EU eastern land border, with an increase of 15.5 % 
during January-June 2015 compared with the first half of 2014. Most Ukrainians crossing the 
border do so in order to shop in Poland and stayed there for up to a a day. The main flows of 
travellers come from towns located up to 30 km from the border.  
Ukraine  has  concluded  separate  local  border  traffic  agreements  (LBTAs)  with  Poland, 
Slovakia and Hungary that lay down simplified border crossing procedures for residents in the 
border area. LBTAs are primarily intended to increase cross-border trade, social and cultural 
exchanges and regional cooperation.   

Visa applications 

On short-stay visas, the Commission has data from the Member States on issuing and refusal 
rates. Table 3 below shows a 12 % decrease in visa applications by Ukrainian citizens in 2014 
compared  with  2013.  1.35  million  C  visas  were  issued  to  Ukrainian  citizens  in  2014 
(compared with roughly 1.54 million in 2013).  

In  2014  the  countries  that  received  the  most  visa  applications  from  Ukrainian  citizens  were 
Poland (566 976), Greece (145 621), Hungary (118 740), Germany (101 867) and Spain (76 
983).   

The  proportion  of  multiple  entry  visas  (MEVs)  issued  to  Ukrainian  nationals  during  2014 
increased  to  52.4  %  (compared  with  39  %  in  2013).  This  is  likely  a  direct  result  of  the 
implementation of the provisions introduced by the upgraded visa facilitation agreement with 
Ukraine  since  1  July  2013,  which  limited  the  discretion  of  Member  State  consuls  when 
issuing MEVs for the categories of Ukrainian visa applicants covered by the facilitations. Half 
30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
of all MEVs issued to Ukrainian nationals in 2014 (708 826) were delivered by Poland (368 
515) followed by Hungary (65 665), Greece (52 189), Germany (39 338), Slovakia (35 251) 
and Lithuania (30 746).  

The average visa refusal rate for short-stay visa applications submitted by Ukrainian nationals 
in 2013 was 1.70 %, while in 2014 the average refusal rate was 2 %. 

The consular authorities of Member States have differing  perceptions of irregular migration 
risks  when  it  comes  to  issuing  short-stay  visas  to  Ukrainians.  Refusal  rates  differ  among 
Member States, ranging in 2014 from 4.6 % for Sweden to just 0.6 % for Lithuania. 

These  differing  perceptions  of  the  irregular  migration  risks  are  likely  to  remain  even  after 
possible visa liberalisation and will be driven by similar considerations i.e. risk of overstay or 
abuse of visa-free travel to engage in illegal work.  

Table 3: Applications for short-stay and multiple entry Schengen visas in Ukraine, 2013-
2014 (countries with consular presence in Ukraine) 

Schengen 
State 

C visas 
applied 
for 2013 

C visas 
issued 
2013 

MEVs 
issued 
2013 

MEVs 
issuing 
rate 
2013 

C visas 
not 
issued 
2013 

C visa 
refusal 
rate 
2013 

C visas 
applied 
for 2014 

C visas 
issued 
2014 

MEVs 
issued 
2014 

MEVs 
issuing 
rate 
2014 

C visas 
not 
issued 
2014 

C visa 
refusal 
rate 
2014 

30,633 
9,098 

30,405 
8,435 

8,273 
2,814 

27.2% 
33.4% 

224
487

0.7%
5.4%

22,510
8,416

22,334
7,521

8,552
3,281

38.3%
43.6%

173 
803 

0.8% 
9.5% 

C visas 
applied 
for 
change 
13-14 
-26.5% 
-7.5% 

C visas 
issued 
change 
13-14 

-26.5%
-10.8%

Austria 
Belgium 
Czech 
Republic 
Denmark 
Estonia 
Finland 
France 
Germany 
Greece 
Hungary 
Italy 
Lithuania 
Netherlands 
Norway 
Poland 
Portugal 
Slovakia 
Slovenia 
Spain 
Sweden 
Switzerland 
Total 

79,343 

78,197 

14,096 

18.0% 

1,092 

1.4% 

59,607 

58,382 

17,468 

29.9% 

1,191 

2.0% 

-24.9% 

-25.3% 

6,957 
17,576 
16,803 
49,360 
112,209 
203,098 
152,073 
63,609 
30,495 
27,063 
7,179 
538,181 
6,528 
88,144 
8,707 
105,956 
9,133 
13,083 
1,587,223  1,534,972

6,357 
15,925 
16,470 
48,965 
104,800
201,858
150,697
57,344 
29,546 
26,141 
7,003 
517,725
6,493 
82,275 
8,471 
104,692
8,736 
12,861 

2,251 
35.4% 
9,146 
57.4% 
2,707 
16.4% 
7,264 
14.8% 
35,605 
34.0% 
23,109 
11.4% 
58,930 
39.1% 
10,353 
18.1% 
18,568 
62.8% 
12,868 
49.2% 
23.8% 
1,666 
298,124  57.6% 
23.9% 
1,554 
78.0% 
64,171 
92.1% 
7,803 
4.2% 
4,447 
51.7% 
4,513 
45.7% 
5,873 
39.0%  27,165
598,364 

117
530
229
387
7,390
1,214
1,376
859
350
831
176
9,904
35
711
213
535
223
213

7,734
14,993
13,772
35,865
101,867
145,621
118,740
53,626
38,993
22,303
6,221
566,976
6,008
49,466
5,956
76,983
9,325
10,231

1.7%
3.0%
1.4%
0.8%
6.6%
0.6%
0.9%
1.4%
1.1%
3.1%
2.5%
1.8%
0.5%
0.8%
2.4%
0.5%
2.4%
1.6%
1.7% 1,387,086

7,435
14,441
13,126
35,520
96,807
143,789
117,177
48,939
37,349
21,127
5,991
556,503
5,938
48,840
5,860
75,734
8,142
9,763
1,351,757

3,516
9,558
2,698
7,285
39,338
52,189
62,665
14,805
30,746
14,395
2,441
368,515
2,554
35,251
5,521
13,179
4,698
4,797
708,826

136 
47.3%
357 
66.2%
626 
20.6%
20.5%
327 
40.6% 5,005 
36.3% 1,832 
53.5% 1,522 
832 
30.3%
236 
82.3%
955 
68.1%
218 
40.7%
66.2% 10,219 
43.0%
72.2%
94.2%
17.4% 1,024 
426 
57.7%
49.1%
467 
52.4% 27,273 

70 
739 
96 

1.8% 
2.4% 
4.5% 
0.9% 
4.9% 
1.3% 
1.3% 
1.6% 
0.6% 
4.3% 
3.5% 
1.8% 
1.2% 
1.5% 
1.6% 
1.3% 
4.6% 
4.6% 
2.0% 

17.0%
11.2% 
-9.3%
-14.7% 
-20.3%
-18.0% 
-27.5%
-27.3% 
-7.6%
-9.2% 
-28.8%
-28.3% 
-22.2%
-21.9% 
-14.7%
-15.7% 
26.4%
27.9% 
-19.2%
-17.6% 
-14.5%
-13.3% 
7.5%
5.4% 
-8.5%
-8.0% 
-40.6%
-43.9% 
-30.8%
-31.6% 
-27.7%
-27.3% 
-6.8%
2.1% 
-21.8% 
-24.1%
-12.6% -11.9%

Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs. 
October 2015 

According to experts at the EU institutions and border agencies of the neighbouring countries, 
at  present,  the  migration  situation  at  the  EU's  common  border  with  Ukraine  is  considered 
stable and under control.  

It  is  not  possible  to  measure  the  extent  to  which  the  visa  requirements  have  deterred 
Ukrainians  from  travelling  to  the  EU.  However,  it  is  reasonable  to  assume  that  lifting  visa 
requirements for Ukrainians would increase the likelihood of them leaving their home country 
to  travel  to  the  EU.  However  the  decision  of  Ukrainians  whether  or  not  to  travel  to  the  EU 
will also depend to a large extent on their financial means.  

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Abolishing  the  visa  requirement  would  also  be  expected  to  result  in  increased  circularity  in 
migratory  flows  between  Ukraine  and  the  Schengen  area.  This  in  turn  would  strengthen 
people-to-people contacts.  

2.1.3. Irregular migration trends 

Refusals of entry at the border 

In  2014,  Ukrainian  nationals  ranked  second  (after  Morocco  and  followed  by  Albanians)  in 
being refused entry at the EU's external borders.   

The  number  of  Ukrainians  refused  entry  decreased  from  2012  to  2014  (see  the  Eurostat 
indicators in Table 4). 16 150 refusals of entry were issued to Ukrainians in 2014, a decrease 
of  roughly  1  000  cases  compared  with  2013.  However,  provisional  data  from  Frontex 
indicates that in 2015 the number of refusals of entry issued to Ukrainians has increased and 
was mostly concentrated on the land border with Poland.  

Already in 2014, most of refusals (almost 70 %) occurred at the Polish land border. Hungary 
and  Romania  issued  the  second  and  third  largest  number  of  refusals  of  entry  to  Ukrainians 
nationals (2 040 and 855 refusals respectively). 

Table 4: Ukrainian citizens refused entry at the EU's external borders 2011-2014 

EU Member States and Schengen area 
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 

2011 
16 440
15
65
15
0
120
30
50
35
20
40
NA
75
25
45
60
0
4 560
5
70
15
9 115
5
1 125

32 

2012 
18 655
25
185
10
5
135
35
30
60
30
40
NA
60
15
70
55
0
2 985
0
55
0
12 555
5
1 320

2013 
17 095 
25 
130 
10 
0 
150 
30 
30 
55 
15 
35 
220 
125 
20 
65 
60 
0 
2 190 
0 
50 
5 
12 060 
5 
1 000 

2014 
16 150
25
50
10
10
165
45
75
60
10
45
185
150
50
50
70
0
2 040
0
45
5
11 185
10
855

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 20.08.2015, extracted on 13.10.2015 

100
550
15
0
300
NA
0
0
10

125
530
20
0
305
NA
0
0
25

80 
395 
25 
0 
295 
NA 
0 
0 
25 

25
410
30
0
535
NA
0
10
30

A  large  proportion  of  the  refusals  of  entry  into  the  EU  and  Schengen  area  are  issued  to 
Ukrainian nationals were due to them not holding valid visa or residence permits or because 
they did not have the appropriate documentation to justify the purpose and conditions of stay.  

Ukrainian nationals are prominent among other nationalities using of false documents to enter 
the EU: 981 Ukrainians were identified as using falsified documents at the EU and Schengen 
border in 2014 and 516 in the first half of 2015. Most cases were detected exiting Ukraine at 
its land borders with Poland and Hungary. In most cases, those caught had counterfeit border 
crossing stamps in their passports, typically to fabricate their travel history and extend their 
periods  of  stay.  People  do  this  to  avoid  being  caught  overstaying,  which  usually  has  quite 
negative consequences for the migrant in question i.e. removal and an entry ban. False border 
stamps  are  intended  to  show  that  the  person  has  exited  the  Schengen  area  and  give  the 
impression that the person is now re-entering.  

The  visa  information  system  recently  launched  in  Ukraine  (as  of  23  June  2015)  should 
improve the management of visa issues in the long-term. 

Border management 

Compared  with  nationals  of  countries  in  the  western  Balkans  prior  to  visa  liberalisation, 
would-be labour migrants from Ukraine have fewer incentives to try to cross borders illegally. 
This is because Ukrainian nationals have sufficient legal travel channels for entering the EU 
such  as:  fully  functional  local  border  traffic  agreements  with  neighbouring  Member  States; 
simplified  rules  for  short-term  employment  in  some  Member  States  and  low  single  visa 
rejection rates.  

Indeed, despite rapid political and economic changes resulting from the drawn-out conflict in 
the east of Ukraine, the figures show few illegal border crossings with the purpose of irregular 
migration. Frontex reports that illegal border crossings are a marginal issue.  In 2014, only 60 
out of 154 cases of illegal crossings at border crossing points involving Ukrainian nationals 
were  linked  to  irregular  migration.  The  number  of  cases  is  negligible  given  the  size  of 
Ukraine's population (roughly 45 million) and the length of its borders with the EU.   

Ukraine  has  been  able  to  keep  border  surveillance  on  migratory  issues  at  a  sufficient  level 
despite  the  crisis.  EUBAM  had  found  that  although  Ukraine  still  has  to  make  progress  on 
capacity  building,  it  has  improved  operational  capacities  at  its  borders,  particularly  at  the 
border  with  Moldova  where  EUBAM  is  actively  involved  in  bringing  the  border  protection 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
system  into  line  with  EU  standards.  Ukraine  also  operates  joint  patrols  with  the  border 
services of neighbouring EU member States and with Moldova and Belarus. 

The ongoing conflict will continue to have a significant impact on the capacity of Ukraine to 
manage its borders adjacent to the conflict area, including flow of people and goods in and out 
of the country. Ukraine adopted legislation regulating entry into and exit from the territories 
not  under  Government  control:  access  from/to  the  rest  of  Ukraine  is  allowed  only  through 
several  check  points  on  the  basis  of  a  special  permit.  Foreigners  travelling  from  another 
country to Ukraine cannot enter legally the country through these check points. Based on the 
Minsk  Package  of  12  February  2015,  Ukraine  should  re-establish  control  of  the  currently 
uncontrolled  sections  of  its  eastern  border  with  the  Russian  Federation  by  the  end  of  2015. 
However,  following  the  summit  in  Normandy  format  in  Paris  on  2  October  2015,  it  was 
publicly admitted that some provisions of the Minsk package of measures will not be possible 
to implement by that deadline. 

Detection of irregular migrants 

Ukrainians  tend  to  travel  to  the  EU  and  the  Schengen  area  using  legal  and  regular  travel 
channels. Most Ukrainian nationals move to the EU and Schengen area by using to work and 
stay  as  regular  migrants.  "Illegal  stays"  cover  two  possible  situations:  cases  where  people 
have  entered  the  country  irregularly  and  are  detected  staying  illegally;  cases  where  people 
entered  legally  but  overstayed  the  duration  of  their  regular  visa  or  residence  permits.  This 
second  situation  can  also  involve  cases  where  Ukrainian  citizens  fail  to  have  their  first  or 
successive residence permits renewed because they lose their jobs and might be requested to 
leave the EU country in which they are residing. Ukrainian nationals reluctant to return home 
have  largely  continued  to  use  the  same  modus  operandi  over  the  past  several  years,  i.  e. 
abusing the legal entry channels. Therefore it is logical that the countries hosting the largest 
number  of  Ukrainian  citizens  with  visa/temporary  residence  permits  also  detect  the  highest 
number of illegal stays. 

Many Ukrainian migrants have been detected staying illegally in the EU and Schengen area.  
In 2014, Ukrainian nationals were the eighth most likely third country nationals to be detected 
staying illegally in the EU.  

Eurostat  data  show  that  although  the  number  of  detections  of  Ukrainian  illegal  stayers  was 
relatively stable between 2008 and 2010 at about 12 000 detections a year, in 2014 the figure 
jumped to 16 600, a 37 % rise on 2013. In 2014, Poland was the EU country where most of 
the  Ukrainian  illegal  stayers  were  detected  (7  455  persons)  followed  by  Hungary  (1  460), 
Germany (1 455), Sweden (where the 2014 figure of 1 225 showed a very high increase on 
2013) and the Czech Republic (1 020). Based on the figures available so far for 2015, Frontex 
suggests that there may be a further increase in 2015. 

Nevertheless,  compared  with  the  number  of  valid  permits,  the  number  of  irregular  migrants 
detected  is  not  high.  Furthermore,  Frontex  has  also  found  that  almost  half  of  Ukrainian 
irregular migrants were identified when exiting the EU's external air and land borders (mainly 
at  the  Polish  and  Hungarian  borders  with  Ukraine).  In  other  words,  those  people  were 
voluntarily returning home.  

During  the  first  half  of  2015,  there  was  a  significant  increase  (85  %)  in  detections  of 
Ukrainian illegal stayers exiting Poland to return to Ukraine compared with the same period 
34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
in 2014. This seems to indicate ongoing transit through Poland in both directions i.e. circular 
migratory pattern.  

Table  5:  Third  country  nationals  found  to  be  present  illegally  (annual  data  for 
Ukrainians), 2009-2014  

EU Member States and Schengen area 
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 20.08.15, extracted on 13.10.2015 

2009 
11 220
150
10
1 500
10
1 155
15
60
150
1 060
355
NA
1 480
120
15
130
0
1 000
10
125
220
2 070
520
105
5
410
25
135
385
0
0
10
75

2010 
10 875
145
10
955
5
1 070
20
35
105
955
290
NA
1 460
120
10
125
5
1 605
5
140
230
1 885
470
85
145
365
25
105
510
NA
0
NA
65

2011 
11 880
130
15
1 125
5
1 095
35
15
100
840
375
NA
690
180
5
90
0
1 095
20
105
195
3 995
425
120
105
370
30
165
555
NA
0
10
50

2012 
12 555 
165 
10 
1 065 
0 
1 280 
35 
35 
75 
640 
310 
NA 
720 
135 
5 
70 
5 
1 310 
10 
NA 
185 
4 800 
480 
75 
20 
335 
40 
105 
640 
NA 
0 
45 
60 

2013 
12 060 
135 
5 
890 
5 
1 265 
45 
25 
95 
380 
340 
5 
570 
120 
10 
75 
0 
1 370 
5 
NA 
190 
5 210 
280 
70 
10 
355 
35 
95 
490 
NA 
0 
20 
70 

2014 
16 600
225
5
1 020
0
1 455
60
5
115
590
565
10
490
70
5
75
0
1 460
5
NA
410
7 455
235
55
10
500
70
1 225
490
NA
0
45
65

2.1.4. Possible consequences of a visa-free regime  

Simplified  travel  arrangements  are  expected  to  result  in  increased  circularity  in  migratory 
flows between Ukraine and the EU. This is turn will strengthen people-to-people contacts. It 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
is  likely  that  if  a  visa-free  regime  with  the  EU/Schengen  area  is  implemented,  flows  of 
Ukrainian immigrants will become more self-regulated and more regularised.  

Regarding labour migration, if there is no demand for specific jobs, Ukrainian nationals will 
either refrain from entering the EU countries and/or leave the EU area. In the latter case, they 
will leave safe in the knowledge that they can return if better economic opportunities arise. 

Regarding  irregular  migration,  Eurostat  data  shows  roughly  that  the  most  popular  countries 
for Ukrainian nationals' first place of residence also have the highest number of detections of 
irregular  migration.  The  detection  of  irregular  migrants  has  grown  significantly  since  2013.  
The  number  of  irregular  migrants  detected  is  not  very  high  at  present  compared  with  the 
number  of  valid  residence  permits,  but  the  number  of  irregular  migrants  being  detected  is 
increasing.  The  most  likely  modus  operandi  will  continue  to  be  the  use  of  false  entry/exit 
stamps and abuse of legal forms of entry, although visa-free regime arrangements could limit 
this trend.  

Nevertheless  almost  half  of  the  detected  overstayers  were  identified  when  exiting  the  EU's 
external  air  and  land  borders  i.e.  voluntarily  returning  home.  Visa  liberalisation  will  not 
reduce the effectiveness of measures in the EU and Ukraine to counter irregular migration.  

Ukraine's successful implementation of local border traffic agreements with neighbouring EU 
countries  has  enabled  many  Ukrainian  citizens  to  enjoy  visa-free  travel.  The  local  border 
traffic agreements can be considered as a test run for visa liberalisation.  

According to Passport Index,7 Ukrainian citizens are already exempted from a short-stay visa 
obligation  by  96  countries.  The  rules  of  stay  for  these  visa-free  regimes  are  largely  being 
complied with.   

2.2. Asylum: trends and possible consequences of a visa-free travel 

In 2014, 14 060 Ukrainian nationals applied for asylum in EU Member States (14 415 in the 
Schengen area). According to Eurostat data asylum applications from Ukrainian citizens are 
widely  distributed  throughout  Europe,  with  highest  numbers  of  applicants  registered  in 
Germany (2 705) followed by Poland (2 275), Italy (2 080), France (1 425), Sweden (1 320), 
Spain (895), Belgium (570), the Czech Republic (515) and Austria (455).  The most popular 
countries for asylum applications are also the most popular destination countries of Ukrainian 
migrants.  With  the  exception  of  Poland,  EU  countries  neighbouring  Ukraine  received  very 
few applicants.  

Table 6: Asylum applicants by citizenship (Ukraine), 2008-2014   

EU Member States  
and Schengen area  
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 

7 www.passportindex.org 

2008 
925
65
0

2009 
935
35
10

2010 
830
65
5

2011 
940
75
0

2012 
1 095 
90 
10 

2013 
1 055
65
0

2014 
14 060
570
40

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
320
5
45
0
20
55
5
75
NA
15
15
0
5
5
0
0
20
140
40
0
0
0
30
10
55

Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Total 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 09.09.15, extracted on 13.10.2015. 

150
20
55
0
10
30
10
100
NA
20
10
5
0
0
5
0
50
65
65
5
5
5
5
10
190
50
0
0
15
25
980

200
5
85
0
15
50
10
75
NA
10
25
0
0
0
10
0
20
120
35
5
10
0
15
5
130
65
0
5
25
30
995

115
5
70
0
5
50
5
90
NA
20
10
0
0
5
10
0
30
80
45
0
10
0
20
10
120
55
0
0
10
15
855

0
0
20
30
975

: 

175 
15 
135 
0 
15 
45 
20 
145 
NA 
35 
5 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
30 
80 
70 
5 
0 
5 
5 
15 
130 
60 
0 
10 
30 
30 
1 165 

145
40
150
0
10
20
15
135
0
35
0
0
5
0
5
0
35
60
45
0
10
0
15
5
170
75
0
0
25
40
1 120

515
135
2 705
60
50
110
895
1 425
10
2 080
95
75
70
25
35
40
265
455
2 275
155
35
15
25
300
1 320
285
15
5
130
210
14 415

Significant pull factors for Ukrainian nationals' choice of the destination country include the 
presence  of  an  established  Ukrainian  diaspora  or  previous  experience  in  the  destination 
country for work or study, although there are also other factors that play a role. Therefore the 
presence  of  Ukrainian  residents  in  different  countries  seems  to  be  mirrored  in  the 
geographical distribution of Ukrainian applicants for asylum.  

Certain characteristics of the asylum system in a particular EU country / Schengen state may 
also  act  as  pull  factors  for  people  who  are  not  in  need  of  international  protection,  but  who 
instead want to come to the EU and access other benefits linked to the asylum procedure.  

The  experience  of  EU  countries  with  applicants  from  countries  in  the  western  Balkans  has 
been  that  the  combination  of  a  lengthy  procedure  and  cash  benefits  (which  are  substantial 
when  compared  with  the  usual  level  of  income  in  the  country  of  origin)  may  act  as  a  pull 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
factor  for  large  numbers  of  unfounded  applications,  including  repeat  applications,  made  by 
people with no valid grounds for claiming international protection. 8  

2.2.1. Consequences of the Ukrainian crisis  

About 1 000 Ukrainians per year sought asylum in the EU and Schengen area between 2008 
and 2013. Based on Eurostat statistical data, the highest number of applications were recorded 
in 2003 (5 100) and 2004 (4 655), coinciding with times of political change in the country. 
Even if Ukrainians are not primarily interested in seeking international protection and prefer 
using  other  channels  to  legalise  their  stay,  the  number  of  asylum  applicants  has  grown 
substantially as a result of the ongoing crisis in the eastern part of the country.  

Eurostat  data  show  that  the  number  of  asylum  applications  by  Ukrainian  nationals  rose 
significantly in 2014 in a large number of the EU and Schengen countries. In 2014 there were 
over  14  060  applications  for  asylum  by  Ukrainian  nationals,  compared  with  only  1  055  in 
2013. The figure rose each month during the first 10 months of 2014, with the highest number 
of applicants (2 260) being recorded in October 2014.  

Despite some countries reporting an increase in the number of refusals  of entry, Ukrainians 
have  been  able  to  obtain  a  visa  to  travel  legally  to  the  EU  and  Schengen  country  of  their 
choice and then apply for international protection.  

It is also important to note that according to OCHA9 reports, the total number of Ukrainians 
who entered in neighbouring countries stood at 1 123 800 as of 7 September 2015, with the 
majority going to the Russian Federation (911 500) and Belarus (126 450). 

At the beginning of 2015 the number of Ukrainian applicants remained stable but still stood at 
about 1 500 applicants a month, in spite of hopes for a peaceful solution to the crisis in the 
east of the country after the signature of ceasefire agreements in September 2014 (the Minsk 
Protocol  and  Memorandum)  and  February  2015  (Minsk  Package  of  Measures).  The  current 
number  of  applications  is  more  than  15  times  the  average  monthly  level  of  applicants 
registered  before  the  crisis.  However,  a  decrease  has  been  observed  in  the  second  half  of 
2015.  

From  the  beginning  of  EU-level  data  collection  in  2008  until  2013,  recognition  rates  for 
Ukrainian applicants at first instance were rather low, ranging on average from 7 % to 14 % 
per  year.  In  2014,  however,  the  rate  rose  to  18  %,  as  did  the  number  of  positive  decisions. 
This  reflected  the  changes  in  the  situation  in  the  country,  as  indicated  by  Eurostat  data's 
hereafter in Table 7 below, which shows a total of 520 positive decisions at first instance in 
the  EU  out  of  the  2  860  applications  received  in  2014  (figures  updated  in  October  2015). 
There  is,  however,  a  large  disparity  in  the  recognition  rate  at  first  instance  between 
EU/Schengen  States.  Furthermore,  according  to  information  on  safe  countries  of  origin 
available, Ukraine is still on the safe country of origin lists of Bulgaria, Luxembourg and the 
UK. By contrast, France, Belgium and Switzerland have removed Ukraine from their lists.  

8 European Asylum Support Office (EASO) report: Asylum applicants from the western Balkans: comparative 
analysis of trends, push-pull factors and responses, update May 2015. 
9 The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Table 7: First-instance decisions on applications by citizenship (Ukraine), 2012-2014 and 
positive decisions in 2014 per country 

2014 

2013 

2012 

EU Member States and Schengen area 
2 860 
European Union (28 countries) 
205 
Belgium 
0 
Bulgaria 
375 
Czech Republic 
10 
Denmark 
60 
Germany  
5 
Estonia 
30 
Ireland 
85 
Greece 
80 
Spain 
255 
France 
5 
Croatia 
245 
Italy 
0 
Cyprus 
5 
Latvia 
30 
Lithuania 
0 
Luxembourg 
20 
Hungary 
20 
Malta 
160 
Netherlands 
NA 
Austria 
655 
Poland 
20 
Portugal 
30 
Romania 
10 
Slovenia 
10 
Slovakia 
200 
Finland 
180 
Sweden 
170 
United Kingdom 
5 
Iceland 
0 
Liechtenstein 
80 
Norway 
60 
Switzerland 
3 005 
Total 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 18.09.2015, extracted on 13.10.2015 

880
95
0
195
5
40
0
15
30
15
120
0
15
5
0
5
0
0
0
35
80
50
5
0
0
5
5
115
45
0
10
20
10
915

855
50
5
160
35
40
0
10
30
15
165
0
40
0
0
0
0
0
0
35
45
45
0
5
0
10
15
110
30
0
5
30
30
915

Positive decisions 
in 2014 

520
5
0
150
0
20
0
5
5
0
30
0
165
0
0
25
0
5
20
5
NA
15
15
15
0
5
5
20
5
5
0
0
0
525

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.2.2. Challenges following the Ukrainian crisis 

The determining factor behind the influx of people in need of asylum in the EU since March 
2014 is the political and security situation in and around Ukraine (including Crimea10) and the 
developments  in  the  conflict  areas  in  eastern  Ukraine  (Donetsk  and  Luhansk  regions  in 
particular).  

An agreement brokered during talks of the Trilateral Contact Group on 26 August 2015 has 
resulted in a noticeable de-escalation of hostilities in eastern Ukraine, where it was agreed to 
strictly stick to the ceasefire as of 1 September. This has brought an end to a period of intense 
movements  by  Ukrainians  directly  affected  by  the  conflict.  However,  the  situation  remains 
tense and Ukraine needs to manage the mass exodus of civilians from the regions outside its 
control.  As  of  7  September  2015  there  were  1  460  000  internally  displaced  persons  (IDPs) 
registered  by  the  Ukrainian  Ministry  of  Social  Policy.11  It  cannot  be  ruled  out  that  some  of 
these  people  might  consider  emigration  and  applying  for  asylum  in  the  EU  as  an  option  in 
future if they do not receive enough state support with monthly targeted social assistance i.e. 
social protection for families and children, legal assistance, education, offers of employment, 
guaranteed  pension  funds.  Ukraine  is  actively  cooperating  with  many  international 
organisations  on  international  technical  and  humanitarian  assistance  for  IDPs.  Ukraine  also 
adopted a special legislation on IDPs. 

To note also that whereas the unstable security and political situation was initially the main 
reason  given  for  asylum  applications,  this  pattern  has  changed  since  mid-2014,  with 
applicants now citing grounds not immediately related to the conflict. These include hostility 
faced  by  IDPs,  military  service  and  subsequent  waves  of  mobilisation  into  the  Ukrainian 
army. 

As long as the situation in the east of the country remains unstable, we cannot rule out a rapid 
increase in asylum applications in EU neighbouring countries. Ukrainian citizens and a high 
number of IDPs are struggling to find proper accommodation and face an uncertain future.  

2.2.3. Possible consequences of a visa-free regime 

Most Ukrainian migrants have so far preferred to use legal migration channels rather than the 
asylum procedure. A visa-free regime may not radically change this trend. 

We  may  see  a  decrease  in  the  number  of  asylum  applications  from  Ukrainian  citizens,  as  a 
result of visa liberalisation, since they may see less need to use asylum as a means to stay in 
the EU or Schengen area. 

Conversely, in the context of current flows, a visa-free regime could result in an increase of 
the number of asylum applicants because it would open up legal travel channels and make it 
easier to access to the asylum procedure. 

10  The  Autonomous  Republic  of  Crimea  and  the  city  of  Sevastopol  are  not  under  the  effective  control  of  the 
Ukrainian authorities following their illegal annexation by the Russian Federation. The EU condemns and does 
not recognize the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation. 
11  According  to  UNHCR,  as  of  26  June  2015  there  were  1  354  000  registered  internally  displaced  persons  in 
Ukraine. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
In  this  context,  the  number  of  Ukrainian  asylum  applicants  could  also  rise  if  Ukrainian 
overstayers lodge applications for international protection as a means of legalising their stay.  

To counter this potential abuse of the asylum procedure, Ukraine must continue to implement 
the readmission agreement in place with the EU already since 2008 (including implementing 
protocols  with  EU  Member  States).  At  the  most  recent  meeting  of  the  Joint  Readmission 
Committee on 6 May 2015, the Committee recommended that Ukraine further implement the 
agreement in an effective manner.  As of November 2015, Ukraine has concluded 17 bilateral 
agreements on readmission with third countries.  

The  ongoing  crisis  in  and  around  Ukraine  will  continue  to  be  an  important  factor  affecting 
population movements. So far, the conflict areas are limited to parts of two regions in eastern 
Ukraine, which has triggered only limited migration toward the EU in contrast with the scale 
of  migration  to  the  Russian  Federation  for  instance.  Should  the  crisis  evolve  in  a  way  that 
would degrade the security situation in western regions of Ukraine, where the population has 
more  ties  with  neighbouring  EU  countries,  we  could  see  significant  population  movements 
towards the EU.  

The long-term challenges facing IDPs may also result in an increased flow of Ukrainians for 
which  emigration  and  asylum  application  to  the  EU  might  be  an  option  even  if  Ukraine  is 
actively cooperating with international organisation to manage assistance for IDPs.  

3. ASSESSMENT OF SECURITY IMPACTS 

According  to  various  assessments,  the  shadow  economy  in  Ukraine  has  achieved  a  historic 
high,  accounting  for  between  42  %  and  60  %  of  Ukraine's  GDP12,  which  means  that  the 
shadow  economy  and  the  State  effectively  exist  in  parallel.  The  shadow  economy  covers 
active  illegal  economic  activities,  VAT  fraud,  all  kinds  of  smuggling  and  high-level 
corruption.  Economic  pressure  from  the  conflict  in  eastern  Ukraine  continues  to  create 
demand for goods and sustain the already flourishing black market economy.  

3.1. Organised crime: trends and possible impacts of a visa-free travel 

Ukrainian organised crime groups (OCGs) are active in a large number of EU Member States, 
as well as in countries neighbouring the EU such as Moldova, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, 
the  Russian  Federation  and  Turkey.  The  spread  of  Ukrainian  OCGs  in  the  EU  reflects  their 
increasing international reach.  

Such groups tend to be structured as small to medium sized semi-independent cells with links 
to  broader  networks.  They  use  several  types  of  transport,  including  private  cars,  taxis, 
minibuses and trains. The deliberately use of multiple means of transportation across several 
routes as an effective means of evading law enforcement. 

Russian  speaking  OCGs,  which  include  Ukrainians  among  their  members  invest  mainly  in 
construction,  transportation  and  logistics,  real  estate,  wholesale  and  retail  trade,  hotels,  bars 

12  International  Monetary  Fund  estimates  that  Ukraine's  underground,  and  non-tax-paying  economy  accounted 
for 50 % of the GDP in 2014.   

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
and  restaurants,  while  also  developing  activities  in  cybercrime.  Their  activities  in  the  legal 
economy are often aimed at laundering the proceeds of their criminal activities.13  

Ukrainian  motorcycle  gangs  are  present  in  some  EU  Member  States  and  are  known  to  use 
violence as an integral part of their business strategy. Outlaw motorcycle gang members adopt 
a multi-crime approach.  

Recent data on OCGs inside Ukraine is limited due to the crisis in and around Ukraine, which 
impedes data collection. Nevertheless, available resources show that the Donetsk, Crimea and 
Odessa regions have the highest criminality rates. The eastern Donbass region, which includes 
Donetsk and Luhansk is the historical industrial heart of Ukraine but also the region with the 
highest  level  of  unemployment  and  criminality  increasing  since  the  1990s.  In  view  of  the 
conflict, it is likely that criminal groups will expand their activities not only inside  Ukraine 
but  also  in  neighbouring  countries.  The  use  of  the  Russian  language  facilitates  their 
cooperation with other groups from the region.   

The  general  pattern  of  cross-border  crime  and  irregular  migration  has  not  substantially 
changed: smuggling activities continue to take place at Ukraine's borders. The smuggling of 
goods and illegal border crossing remained key challenges. According to EUBAM, Ukraine's 
priorities  for  the  period  to  come  are  to  formalise  practical  cooperation  between  police  and 
customs  on  information  exchange  and  analysis,  and  to  put  in  place  integrated  operational 
procedures  on  intelligence.  To  note  that  border  control  points  have  been  connected  to  the 
Interpol databases.  

In  order  to  counter  security  threats,  Ukraine  aims  to  strengthen  border  infrastructure  at  its 
border  with  Russia.  Ukraine  may  also  create  special  customs  police  units  for  combating 
smuggling from Transnistria. Ukraine and Republic of Moldova continue in cooperation with 
EU  Border  Assistance  Mission  (EUBAM)  enhancing  the  overall  border  and  customs 
management  capacities  and  their  abilities  to  fight  against  cross  border  and  organised  crime 
and to approximate the standards of the border and law enforcement authorities to those of the 
EU. 

Visa  liberalisation  may  open  up  new  opportunities  for Ukrainian (or  Ukraine  based) OCGs.  
They will presumably adapt their methods to the new conditions created by visa liberalisation 
and  operate  with  greater  flexibility.  However,  removing  the  visa  obligation  for  Ukrainians 
citizens would not have a major impact on organised crime activities in the EU, because most 
criminals  already  travel  through  the  EU.  It  is  therefore  unlikely  that  visa  liberalisation  will 
result in drastic changes in the Ukrainian or EU criminal landscapes.  

3.2. Trafficking in human beings: trends and possible consequences of visa-free travel 

Ukraine  is  a  country  of  origin,  transit  and  increasingly  a  destination  for  trafficking  in  men, 
women  and  children.  Over  120  000  Ukrainians  have  fallen  victim  to  Trafficking  in  Human 
Beings (THB) since 1991, making Ukraine one of the main countries of origin of trafficking 

13 Transcrime study: "From illegal markets to legitimate businesses: The portfolio of organised crime in Europe" 
March 2015. 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
 
in  human  beings  in  Europe.  Economic  hardships  and  unemployment  have  made  the 
population more vulnerable especially in rural areas.   

Ukraine  is  a  source  and  a  transit  country  for  THB  victims  from  some  European  countries 
(Bulgaria,  Croatia,  the  Czech  Republic,  Hungary,  Slovakia  and  Slovenia)  towards  western 
Europe  (France,  Germany,  Italy,  the  Netherlands)  the  Baltic  countries  and  Russia.  The 
Russian Federation remains the top destination country for human trafficking from Ukraine, 
but EU is second on the list.  

Most  victims  are  used  for  forced  labour  and  sexual  exploitation  in  EU  countries.  Ukrainian 
OCGs  involved  in  THB  use  residence  permits  or  legal  businesses  owned  in  EU  Member 
States to issue invitation letters for visas. Although there is not enough reliable information on 
the  impact  of  the  Ukrainian  crisis  on  THB  it  can  be  assumed  that  OCGs  are  taking  the 
increased number of vulnerable people as an opportunity.   

Indeed, Ukraine may face a heightened risk of an increase in trafficking in human beings due 
to the high numbers of persons fleeing from the territories not under the effective control of 
the Government. This displaced population is deemed to be very vulnerable to intermediaries 
looking  for  potential  victims.  Through  regular  press  monitoring  and  discussions  with 
internally displaced persons, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) identified the 
following trends by separatists in conflict-affected areas: kidnapping of women and girls who 
are then subjected to sexual exploitation and/or forced labour; forced recruitment of men and 
boys  into  the  separatist  groups  for  exploitation  in  conflict  and  forced  labour.  The  IOM  is 
helping the Ukrainian government to counter fraud in employment linked to THB.  

We are likely to see an increase in THB from Ukraine to the EU as a result of the combination 
of the current crisis in the country and the increased freedom of movement under a visa-free 
regime.  

To  counter  this,  Ukraine  has  put  together  a  comprehensive  raft  of  measures  to  fight  against 
THB: the law on the combat of human trafficking, the national strategy for human rights, the 
state targeted social programme combating human trafficking. Ukraine has also approved the 
concept  for  the  State  programme  combating  human  trafficking  until  2020.  Ukraine  aims  to 
further  improve  the  coordination  between  law  enforcement  agencies  (police,  border, 
migration,  etc.)  both  inside  the  country  and  internationally  to  prevent,  detect  and  stamp  out 
crimes related to human trafficking.  

3.3. Facilitation of irregular immigration: trends and possible consequences of visa-free 
travel 

Document security 

Little  information  is  available  on  the  extent  to  which  Ukrainians  OCGs  are  involved  in 
facilitating irregular migration to the EU, but this phenomenon remains a significant threat to 
the  Ukraine's  internal  and  border  security.  However,  Ukrainian  criminals  use  stolen,  forged 
and counterfeit identity documents to facilitate the movement of irregular migrants. In some 
cases, Ukrainian nationals with a residence permit or dual nationality in an EU Member State 
have been known to help migrants travel to the EU by issuing them with invitations for work. 
Furthermore, false visa stickers for EU Member States and the Schengen area are produced in 
factories in Ukraine.  

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Migrant crisis  

Ukraine  plays  multiple  roles  as  a  country  of  destination  and  as  a  transit  zone  for  illegal 
migrants heading for Europe.  

The crisis in Syria has changed the structure and composition of migratory flows in Ukraine, 
with  an  increased  number  of  migrants  from  Syria  but  also  from  Afghanistan,  Iraq,  Iran  and 
Pakistan.  Data  from  the  Ukrainian  Ministry  of  Foreign  Affairs  show  that  most  asylum 
applicants in Ukraine in 2014 were Afghans (275) and Syrians (267). In 2014, the Ukrainian 
State Migration Service processed applications by 1 173 persons. Of these, 105 were granted 
refugee status and 222 were recognised as being in need of subsidiary protection. On irregular 
migration, the State Migration Service reports that 3 135 irregular migrants were detected in 
2014, and 1 420 during the first quarter of 2015.  

The conflict in eastern Ukraine could make the destabilised border regions more attractive as 
a transit area for migrants from eastern European, central Asian and ex-USSR countries. It is 
also  possible  that  migrants  wishing  to  reach  the  EU  may  increasingly  use  Ukraine  as  an 
alternative  route  to  the  harsher  restrictions  being  put  in  place  in  some  transit  countries.  
European  and  western  Balkans  criminal  groups  currently  active  in  illicit  trafficking  may 
change  their  focus  to  facilitating  irregular  immigration  due  to  the  high  demand  for  such 
services. Ukrainian  OCGs are already involved in smuggling migrants into the EU:  we are 
seeing more reports of Ukrainian nationals acting as facilitators though there is no evidence of 
an  organised  network.  In  2015  the  Ukrainian  government  dismantled  16  criminal  groups 
involved in moving people illegally across borders. 

The  increased  freedom  of  movement  of  Ukrainian  OCGs  could  lead  to  an  increase  in  the 
smuggling of people towards Europe, even if the figures are not as high as for Turkey and the 
Balkans. Nevertheless, Ukraine is developing measures to counter the facilitation of irregular 
migration.  

3.4. Arms and drug trafficking: trends and possible consequences of visa-free travel 

There  is  no  evidence  available  to  suggest  that  Ukrainian  OCGs  are  involved  in  arms 
trafficking within the EU but violent OCGs could take advantage of the possible proliferation 
of  weapons  in  Ukraine,  resulting  in  weapons  being  smuggled  into  EU  Member  States  by 
firearms  traffickers.  Given  the  conflict,  access  to  weapons  has  likely  become  easier  and 
cheaper but even if we can assume that weapons are diverted from the conflict zones it is not 
clear whether these firearms remain in the country or are trafficked to destination outside of 
Ukraine  for  criminal  purposes,  potentially  presenting  a  threat  to  the  EU  with  border  traffic 
increases. 

Regarding drugs, in the context of a destabilised Ukraine, drug trafficking OCGs could seize 
the opportunity to use the northern route from  Afghanistan  to  western Europe through Iran, 
Turkey, Ukraine, Bulgaria and Romania. A rising trend can be seen in significant seizures of 
heroin at the Ukrainian borders. The Black Sea port in Odessa is known as a hub for heroin 
trafficking to the EU.  

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
In this context, a visa-free regime may increase drug flows and make it harder to detect them, 
especially  when  drugs  are  transported  by  rail  or  air:  OCGs  may  also  use  people  travelling 
from Ukraine to the EU as drug couriers.  

3.5. Excise fraud: trends and possible consequences of visa-free travel 

Ukraine  is  a  country  of  origin  and  transit  country  for  counterfeit  alcohol,  cheap  cigarettes, 
medicines and pesticides. Cigarettes are one of the most frequently smuggled goods through 
Ukraine's borders. The scale of the trafficking to the EU is significant: Ukraine plays a central 
role in supplying the EU markets with counterfeit tobacco products.  

The scale  of the smuggling is  difficult to assess given the lack of detailed data.  However it 
might be assessed that although OGCs are often involved, individuals with no prior criminal 
background may also get involved in the trafficking and take advantage of a visa-free regime. 

3.6. Property crime: trends and possible consequences of visa-free travel 

Available data suggest that Ukrainian OCGs involved in motor vehicle crime cooperate with 
Lithuanian,  Moldovan  and  Russian  networks.  Other  nationals  involved  in  this  criminal 
activity  include  Bulgarians  and  Belarusians.  Ukrainian  groups  are  also  active  in  northern 
European  countries,  smuggling  large  amounts  of  stolen  goods  through  central  European 
countries. Such activities could develop with increased movements under a visa-free regime.   

3.7. Financial crime: trends and possible consequences of visa-free travel 

Ukraine is a victim of several types of financial crime.  As Ukraine's banking system is less 
robust, it is used for money laundering, particularly of the proceeds of offences such as grand 
larceny, illegal gambling, abuse of online banking and VAT fraud. The proceeds of crime are 
laundered  by  the  same  groups  that  commit  the  initial  offences.  No  specialised  OCGs 
providing  money  laundering  services  have  been  detected  although  Ukrainian  nationals  with 
EU residence permits are also involved in money laundering. Currently there are no grounds 
to believe that a visa-free regime would affect this type of criminal activity.    

3.8. Terrorism financing: trends and possible consequences of visa-free travel 

There is no official information to suggest that there are any foreign terrorist fighters from the 
EU  or  abroad  in  Ukraine,  that  foreign  terrorist  fighters  transit  Ukraine  heading  for  conflict 
zones  such  as  Syria  and  Iraq,  or  that  terrorism  is  financed  from  inside  the  country.  The 
preferred  route  for  foreign  terrorist  fighters  from  the  EU  to  reach  conflict  areas  is  through 
central European countries to Turkey. However, increased law enforcement controls on these 
routes are making travel more difficult for foreign terrorist fighters.  

As  a  result,  OCGs  may  consider  alternate  routes  and  there  is  concern  that  Ukraine  may  be 
used  as  an  indirect  route  to  middle  eastern  conflict  zones.  Some  evidence  suggests  that 
Ukrainian groups are already involved in the smuggling of Syrian citizens into the EU, so it is 
possible  to  assume  that  irregular  migration  channels  could  be  also  used  to  facilitate  the 
movement of foreign terrorist fighters from the EU to conflict zones.  

45 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4. MAIN CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY IN CASE OF VISA FREE-REGIME  

The  data  and  information  available  give  prospective  main  trends  in  migration  and  security 
areas, showing that the EU remains an attractive destination for migrants from Ukraine with 
potential migratory and also security challenges to be monitored.  

4.1. Key possible impacts on migration trends 

a)  Ukrainians  nationals  are  widespread  across  Europe,  with  roughly  850  000  nationals 
legally residing in the EU in 2013. The most recent trends show a growing interest for 
migration  towards  the  EU.  Regular  passenger  and  circular  migration  flows  between 
the  EU  and  Ukraine  will  increase  significantly  in  the  coming  years  due  to  rising 
regional and global mobility. Visa liberalisation for Ukraine will reduce the barriers to 
travel  to  the  EU  and  will  encourage  regular  temporary  and  circular  migration, 
strengthening people-to-people contacts.  

b)  Given  the  current  economic  situation  in  Ukraine,  the  demand  for  residence  in  EU 
Member States will remain robust and EU will continue to be attractive for Ukrainian 
would-be labour migrants.  

c)  Ukrainian nationals tend to use legal travel channels. The level of irregular migration 
is  not  high  compared  with  the  number  of  valid  permits,  and  almost  half  of  all  cases 
were  identified  when  exiting  the  EU's  external  air  and  land  borders  i.e.  voluntarily 
returning  home.  Still,  the  number  of  irregular  migrants  being  detected  is  increasing, 
Ukrainian nationals' most likely modus operandi will continue to be the abuse of legal 
forms of entry to the EU and Schengen area, although a visa-free regime could limit 
this trend. However, the successful implementation of local border traffic agreements 
with EU Member States are already enabling many Ukrainian citizens to travel visa-
free and as such can be seen as a test run for visa liberalisation. 

d)  The number of asylum applications from Ukraine will probably decrease as a result of 
visa liberalisation as asylum will no longer be seen as one of the best ways of entering 
EU Member States and the Schengen area. On the other hand, it is possible that a visa-
free regime could increase the number of asylum applicants because it would open up 
legal  travel  channels  and  make  access  to  the  asylum  procedure  easier.  Applying  for 
asylum could also be used as a means of legalising overstays and avoiding being sent 
home.  

e)  As long as the situation in eastern Ukraine remains unstable, the EU Member States 
and  the  Schengen  area  will  remain  an  option  for  asylum  seekers.  Rapid  increases  of 
asylum applications at the EU's borders with Ukraine cannot be ruled out if there is an 
important escalation of the conflict in eastern Ukraine. 

f)  Population  movements  will  continue  to  be  affected  by  the  ongoing  crisis  in  eastern 
Ukraine.  The  challenges  facing  IDPs  might  also  result  in  an  increased  flow  of 
Ukrainians  emigrating  to  the  EU  or  seeking  asylum  there.  Ukraine  is  actively 
cooperating with international organisations to manage the assistance for IDPs.  

Possible mitigation measures to be undertaken by the EU Member States 

The EU Member States could consider taking the following actions to reduce migratory risks: 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  Work  more  actively  to  establish  circular/temporary/seasonal  migration  schemes  with 
the Ukrainian government to facilitate legal migration of qualified Ukrainian nationals 
to EU Member States; 

•  Work to establish of legal channels for irregular migrants from Ukraine to regularise 
their  status,  provided  they  qualify  and  meet  the  needs  of  EU  Member  States'  labour 
markets; 

•  Provide opportunities for university graduates from Ukraine who have graduated in an 

EU Member States to extend their stay in order to look for work; 

•  Work with the Ukrainian government to better protect the rights of Ukrainian labour 
migrants  in  the  EU  Member  States  and  to  establish  bilateral  social  benefit  transfer 
systems; 

•  Revise  the  approach  to  processing  asylum  applications,  especially  in  those  EU 
Member States and Schengen associated States where the numbers of asylum claims 
are particularly  high,  to  limit  abuse  of  asylum  benefits.  Further  improve  the 
implementation  of  the  readmission  agreement  EU-Ukraine  at  the  level  of  each 
Member State.   

4.2. Key possible impacts on security trends 

a)  The  increased  spread  of  Ukrainian  organised  crime  in  the  EU  underlines  a  trend 
towards the internationalisation of Ukrainian OCGs. Such groups have already found 
ways to circumvent travel restrictions and are already present in several EU Member 
States.  The  removal  of  the  visa  obligation  for  Ukrainians  citizens  would  not  have  a 
major  impact  on  organised  crime  in  the  EU.  Measures  are  in  place  to  limit  and 
subsequently tackle possible impacts.  

b)  A  visa-free  regime  for  Ukrainian  citizens  would  not  significantly  affect  the 
effectiveness of customs and border control procedures. However, there are concerns 
that  visa  liberalisation  with  Ukraine  may  facilitate  criminal  activities,  especially 
trafficking in human beings and the smuggling of goods from Ukraine to EU Member 
States.  

c)  Ukraine  is  a  platform  for  drug  trafficking  and  plays  a  central  role  in  supplying  EU 
markets  with  counterfeit  tobacco  products.  A  visa-free  regime  may  create  additional 
opportunities  for  Ukrainian  citizens  to  take  part  in  illegal  activities  associated  with 
tobacco and drug smuggling.    

d)  Ukraine  plays  multiple  roles  as  a  country  of  destination,  and  to  a  lesser  extent,  as  a 
transit zone for irregular migrants heading for Europe. OCGs will probably have less 
opportunity  to  facilitate  the  irregular  migration  of  Ukrainian  nationals  into  the  EU, 
compelling criminals to seek new opportunities such as helping Ukrainians to arrange  
long  term  stays  in  the  EU,  or  by  facilitating  the  irregular  migration  of  other 
nationalities  or  ethnic  minorities  from  neighbourhood  countries  in  eastern  Europe  or 
migrants  from  central  Asia  or  the  Middle-East.  Ukraine  is  already  developing 
measures to counter irregular migration services.   

e)  Despite  the  improved  security  measures  in  place,  eastern  regions  of  Ukraine  remain 
high  risk  zones  for  the  smuggling  of  goods  in  and  out  of  the  country.  The  current 
instability  in  eastern  Ukraine  opens  the  door  to  significant  growth  in  activities  by 
Ukrainian and other Russian-speaking OCGs activities in the region, posing a threat to 
the  EU.  For  example,  OCGs  may  use  the  conflict in eastern Ukraine as a source for 
firearms, which may be trafficked to the EU in the future.  

47 

 
 
 
 
 
f)  Under  the  Minsk  Package  of  12  February  2015,  Ukraine  is  supposed  to  re-establish 
control  of  the  currently  uncontrolled  sections  of  eastern  border  with  the  Russian 
Federation by the end of 2015. However, following the summit in Normandy format in 
Paris on 2 October 2015, it was publicly admitted that some provisions of the Minsk 
package  of  measures  will  not  be  possible  to  implement  by  that  deadline.  In  order  to 
counter security threats, Ukraine aims to strengthen border infrastructure at the border 
with  Russia.  Ukraine  regulated  entry  into  and  exit  from  the  territories  not  under 
Government  control.  Ukraine  may  also  create  special  customs  police  for  combating 
smuggling  from  Transnistria.  In  addition,  the  EU  Border  Assistance  Mission 
(EUBAM)  will  continue  enhancing  the  overall  border  and  customs  management 
capacities and the abilities of Moldova and Ukraine to fight against cross border and 
organised crime and to approximate the standards of the border and law enforcement 
authorities  to  those  of  the  EU.  These  measures  will  help  to  address  the  above 
mentioned  concerns  over  the  security  situation,  trafficking  in  human  beings  and  the 
smuggling of people and goods.  

Possible mitigation measures to be undertaken by the EU Member States 

The  EU  Member  States  could  consider  taking  the  following  actions  to  reduce  the  possible 
security impacts of visa free regime with Ukraine: 

•  Conclude bilateral agreements on cooperation in the fight against organised crime and 

• 

establish relevant contact points, and where applicable deploy police attachés; 
Invite Ukrainian counterparts to participate in joint investigation groups (Ukraine-EU 
Member  States),  to  exchange  expertise  and  information  on  the  modus  operandi  of 
Ukrainian criminals; 

•  Further develop existing risk analysis cooperation with EU Member States to combat 

irregular migration;  

•  Speed up conclusion of an agreement with Europol to improve Ukrainian’s tools for 

crime analysis and to facilitate information exchanges.   

48