Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
159
h tt ps: //a mazoni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ IS S N 2322 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.77.05.12
How to Cite:
Shumak, I., Batan, Y., Kravchenko, S., Hedulianov, V., & Bysaha, Y. (2024). Representative democracy under martial
law. Amazonia Investiga, 13(77), 159-169. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.77.05.12
Representative democracy under martial law
Представницька демократія в умовах воєнного стану
Received: April 10, 2024 Accepted: May 30, 2024
Written by:
Ihor Shumak1
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3799-7476
Yurii Batan2
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4924-2054
Serhii Kravchenko3
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6252-3243
Vadym Hedulianov4
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2746-0838
Yurii Bysaha5
https://orcid.org/0009-0001-5340-8531
Abstract
The research of representative democracy under
martial law is extremely relevant, especially in
contemporary times when many countries face
military conflicts and threats to national security.
Notably, the military aggression of the Russian
Federation on the territory of Ukraine has
significantly altered the agenda in Ukraine
regarding elections. In wartime, there arises a need
for swift decision-making, which can lead to
temporary limitations on democratic procedures.
Analyzing this issue will help find a balance
between effective crisis management and
preserving the core of the democratic order. The
purpose of this study is to examine the functioning
of representative democracy under martial law,
particularly how democratic institutions and
processes are preserved and adapted during a crisis
period. The research methodology includes
empirical, comparative, and logical methods. The
study examines the functioning of representative
1
Ph.D., Associate Professor of the Department of Theory and Practice of Management, Faculty of Sociology and Law, National
Technical University of Ukraine "Ihor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute", Ukraine. WoS Researcher ID: KAV-0075-2024
2
Ph.D., Associate Professor at Constitutional Law Department, National University "Odesa Law Academy", Ukraine.
3
Ph.D., Associate Professor, Director of the Center for Extramural and Distance Learning of National University "Odesa Law
Academy", Ukraine.
4
Ph.D, General Director of LLC "G-Advertising LTD", Ukraine. WoS Researcher ID: KTI-7167-2024
5
Ph.D., Associate Professor, Private Notary, Department of Administrative, Financial and Information Law of the Law Faculty of the
Uzhhorod National University, Ukraine.
160
h tt ps: // am az on ia in v es ti ga .i n fo/ I S S N 23 2 2 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
democracy under martial law. It explores the
peculiarities of the operation of democratic
institutions and government bodies during
wartime, including the role of parliament, the
president, and the judiciary. Changes in legislation
aimed at ensuring state security and stability, as
well as mechanisms for protecting citizens' rights
and freedoms, are analyzed. Special attention is
paid to balancing national security and adherence
to democratic principles. Potential risks to
democracy under prolonged martial law and
possible ways to minimize them are also
considered. Conclusions are drawn that, despite
existing restrictions, it is essential to ensure these
restrictions are proportional and temporary, while
maintaining oversight by civil society.
Keywords: war, martial law, democracy,
representative democracy, governance,
legislation, human rights, freedom, elections,
parliament, government.
Introduction
Representative democracy is one of the primary forms of governance that ensures citizen participation in
state decision-making through elected representatives. This system provides stability, legitimacy, and
accountability of power. However, under martial law, when a country faces extraordinary challenges and
threats, questions arise regarding the functioning of representative democracy. During martial law, certain
rights and freedoms of citizens may be restricted, decision-making procedures altered, and special powers
granted to the executive branch.
In this context, several critical questions arise:
− How to maintain the legitimacy of the government and parliament when democratic institutions are
operating under limited conditions?
− How to balance the need to restrict certain rights and freedoms to ensure security with the demands of
a democratic state?
− What is the role of parliament in decision-making during martial law, and how to preserve its
effectiveness?
− How to ensure oversight of the executive branch's actions, which may receive expanded powers?
− How to involve citizens in decision-making when traditional mechanisms of representative democracy
might be restricted?
These questions are crucial for understanding the challenges faced by representative democracy under
martial law. Researching this topic allows for identifying ways to ensure state stability and uphold
democratic principles even during the most challenging periods of national history.
The object of the study is representative democracy under martial law, i.e., the analysis of the governance
system and political processes in a country experiencing a military conflict or martial law.
Shumak, I., Batan, Y., Kravchenko, S., Hedulianov, V., Bysaha, Y. / Volume 13 - Issue 77: 159-169 / May, 2024
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
161
h tt ps: //a mazoni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ IS S N 2322 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
The subject of the study is the interaction between representative democracy and military conflict, including
the analysis of the impact of military actions on democratic institutions, decision-making processes, and
civil society. The study also examines strategies for preserving democratic values and institutions during a
crisis, as well as the influence of international actors on democratic processes in a country under martial
law.
Therefore, the research aims to identify the main challenges and risks faced by democratic systems during
war and to find effective mechanisms for supporting and protecting democratic principles and citizens'
rights. The main tasks include:
− Analyzing changes in legislation and policy aimed at ensuring state security and stability during martial
law.
− Investigating the role of key institutions of representative democracy, such as the parliament, president,
and judiciary, in wartime.
− Assessing the balance between national security and adherence to democratic principles.
The article is consisted of several section:
Theoretical Framework or Literature Review
This section sets the stage by discussing the importance and relevance of studying representative democracy
under martial law. It highlights contemporary issues such as military conflicts and threats to national
security, with a specific focus on the impact of the Russian Federation's aggression in Ukraine. The need
for swift decision-making during wartime and its implications for democratic procedures are addressed.
This section reviews existing literature and theoretical perspectives on maintaining democratic institutions
and processes in crisis situations, aiming to find a balance between effective crisis management and the
preservation of democratic values.
Methodology
This section details the research methodology used in the study. It describes the empirical, comparative,
and logical methods employed to examine the functioning of representative democracy under martial law.
The methodological approach includes analyzing legislative changes, the roles of various democratic
institutions, and mechanisms for protecting citizens' rights and freedoms during wartime. The section
outlines how data was collected and analyzed to understand the operation of government bodies and the
impact of martial law on democratic processes.
Results and Discussion
In this section, the findings of the study are presented and analyzed. It explores the peculiarities of how
democratic institutions, such as the parliament, president, and judiciary, function during wartime.
Legislative changes aimed at ensuring state security and stability are examined, along with their impact on
citizens' rights and freedoms. The discussion focuses on balancing national security needs with adherence
to democratic principles. It identifies potential risks to democracy under prolonged martial law and suggests
ways to minimize these risks. The section provides an in-depth analysis of the challenges and adaptations
of democratic processes in crisis periods.
Conclusion
The final section summarizes the key findings and conclusions of the study. It emphasizes the importance
of ensuring that any restrictions on democratic procedures during martial law are proportional and
temporary. The need for maintaining oversight by civil society is underscored. The conclusion reiterates
the essential balance between effective crisis management and the preservation of democratic values,
stressing that the core democratic order should be upheld even in times of national security threats.
162
h tt ps: // am az on ia in v es ti ga .i n fo/ I S S N 23 2 2 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Theoretical Framework or Literature Review
Firstly, Afanasyeva (2023) focused on the issues surrounding elections in Ukraine that will take place after
the cessation or cancellation of martial law. The restoration of democratic institutions post-war presents
Ukraine with several key issues that need to be discussed and resolved now, including voter locations,
candidates and political parties, electoral commissions at various levels, election timing, funding, judicial
protection, electoral legislation, and European integration aspects. The researcher concluded that war will
have significant institutional, logistical, and legislative impacts on elections, emphasizing the importance
of preparing for future challenges.
Secondly, Andrushko (2023) addressed the challenges of conducting elections during martial law. The
author, with whom we fully agree, argued that holding elections in occupied territories before disarmament,
demilitarization, border control restoration, and ensuring legislative and institutional conditions will not
resolve the conflict, and the election results will not be recognized by conflict participants. Conducting
elections during armed conflict also poses numerous risks and issues that violate the principles of universal
and equal suffrage, potentially leading to elections being deemed illegitimate. Experience from other
countries that had armed conflicts indicates that elections are possible only 2-3 years after the end of
hostilities.
Moreover, Mykhailov (2022) examined ways to realize the people's right to power under martial law. The
author noted that the principle of popular sovereignty can become a societal, political, and legal reality only
if there is a wide range of direct democracy forms through which the people can express their will in daily
life. Protecting the state involves not only defending national but also popular sovereignty. Since the need
for citizens to express their will and shape authoritative decisions is constant, popular sovereignty cannot
be limited regardless of the specific legal regime. Special guarantees of security and stability introduced
during martial law are unconditional, but any restrictions on citizens' participation in various forms of direct
democracy must be balanced by implementing direct democracy mechanisms that do not contradict these
guarantees and do not involve defense matters.
The most effective way to ensure the practical realization of popular sovereignty, and thus the people's right
to direct power, is through mechanisms of direct electronic democracy. The use of information and
communication technologies allows for safe decision-making, encouraging their adoption or participation.
However, we note that the use of IT technologies can pose many risks under conditions of cyberattacks,
internet access issues, and power outages.
Additionally, Chyrkin and Kyrychenko (2024) discussed democracy during wartime, noting that Russia's
military aggression against Ukraine revealed an interesting feature: the Ukrainian people demonstrated a
high level of legal consciousness. Understanding the risks of losing statehood, the nation entered into a new
unwritten social contract with the government, based on unity and joint struggle against the enemy. Even
under military aggression, the people maintain and ensure the fundamental principles of the constitutional
order.
Buga (2023) explored the issue of public consultations under martial law. During wartime, public trust in
government decisions remains critically important, even more so than in peacetime. Democracy should
support high levels of trust in government structures. Although martial law may lead to a ban on elections
and referendums, other democratic methods of influencing the government, such as public consultations,
expertise, and petitions, exist. It is important to develop the legal institution of public consultations and
incorporate it into decision-making processes by authorities. Although some aspects of this process are not
yet perfectly regulated by law, the results of public consultations are advisory and considered in decision-
making. Developing this institution can strengthen democracy in the country and increase public trust in
government structures.
What is more, Szostek and Toremark (2022) noted that the future of democracy in Ukraine depends on the
war's outcome and efforts to build strong independent institutions. Currently, parts of Ukraine are under
occupation by the Russian Federation, a closed and repressive autocracy. The prospects for democracy in
the occupied regions, especially in the east, south, and Crimea, depend on whether Ukraine can expel
Russian occupation forces. Ukraine needs to restore control over its borders to become a full-fledged
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
163
h tt ps: //a mazoni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ IS S N 2322 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
democracy. If Ukraine can protect its borders, regain control over its territory, and secure future security
guarantees, the prospects will be positive. Several key factors contribute to this.
Reilly (2010) discussed post-conflict elections, focusing on institutional challenges such as the absence of
effective state institutions to organize and conduct elections, inadequate legal frameworks, infrastructure
destruction including polling stations and transport routes, security issues for voters, election workers, and
observers, low public trust in the election process due to prior conflict, the possibility of elections
entrenching one side's power, societal divisions due to ethnic, religious, or political conflicts, and the many
limitations and risks of post-conflict elections.
Vodiannikov (2023) examined the challenges of holding elections during the war in Ukraine. The
researcher noted that the motives of foreign allies urging Ukraine to conduct elections even under extreme
conditions are understandable: they seek to prevent Ukraine from backsliding from its democratic path.
However, the risks of holding elections in such conditions are also evident: elections under extreme
conditions are likely to "cement" the current power configuration for the next five years and simultaneously
undermine the societal legitimacy of democratic institutions elected during wartime, creating a favorable
environment for retreating from democracy. Predicting the results of possible elections during the war is
speculative. According to the author, there is no convincing precedent or case where a democracy at war,
with significant parts of its territory occupied or engaged in active combat, managed to conduct free and
fair elections. Wartime conditions affect electoral choices and, even more so, the dynamics of the election
campaign and the fairness of the elections. Therefore, even if the current parliamentary majority lacks broad
public support and would likely lose in peacetime, wartime conditions might allow it to either strengthen
its parliamentary representation or maintain the status quo for the next parliamentary term. The author
concludes, a position we fully agree with, that elections during wartime can only nominally confirm the
country's democratic development.
Sadurski (2019, 2022) explored the collapse of Poland's constitutional order and the transition to an
authoritarian regime. The main ideas from this section can be summarized as follows: analyzing the
differences between illiberal democracy and populist authoritarianism, highlighting that Poland is
transitioning from the former to the latter (the author argues that illiberal democracy is a cover for
systematically undermining democratic institutions and norms, leading to authoritarianism); populism plays
a key role in this process, creating the illusion of popular sovereignty but actually concentrating power in
the hands of a narrow group of politicians; attacks on the rule of law are observed, including changes in the
judicial system and restrictions on judicial independence; the author expresses concern about the future of
democracy in Poland, emphasizing the need to support democratic institutions and principles.
Bugaric (2019) drew attention to the fragility and vulnerability of democracy when confronted with resolute
authoritarian regimes seeking to undermine democratic foundations, transforming them into various forms
of "competitive authoritarianism." The current surge in populism indicates that the rule of law and liberal
democracy are under great threat when their fundamental principles no longer enjoy broad democratic
support. Ultimately, the greatest hope for protecting liberal democracy lies in democratic political parties,
civil society organizations, and a strong core of democracy-committed individuals.
In conclusion, representative democracy under martial law faces numerous challenges and limitations yet
remains an essential mechanism for ensuring legitimacy and governance. Research trends in this field
include examining the impact of martial law on the functioning of representative democracy institutions
and developing strategies to preserve democratic values and processes during wartime. Studies also focus
on developing and improving mechanisms to ensure citizen participation in decision-making, even under
difficult martial law conditions, such as public consultations, discussions, and other forms of public
influence. Additionally, scholarly research analyzes historical and contemporary examples of implementing
representative democracy in conflict conditions to understand their impact on societal stability and peaceful
transitions to democratic institutions post-conflict.
Methodology
Representative democracy under martial law is a complex research object that requires the application of
various scientific research methods.
164
h tt ps: // am az on ia in v es ti ga .i n fo/ I S S N 23 2 2 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
The following methods will be used to study the functioning of representative democracy under martial
law: empirical, comparative, and logical methods. These methods provide a comprehensive and in-depth
analysis of the topic, covering various aspects and levels of research.
Empirical Method: This involves collecting and analyzing real data and facts related to the functioning of
representative democracy during martial law. This method includes:
− Data Collection: Analysis of official documents, laws, decrees, resolutions, as well as reports from
governmental and non-governmental organizations that regulate and describe the peculiarities of
martial law and the activities of democratic institutions during this period.
− Statistical Data Analysis: Collection and analysis of statistical data on changes in political activity,
electoral processes, and violations related to restrictions on citizens' rights and freedoms during martial
law.
Comparative Method: This allows for evaluating the specifics and effectiveness of representative
democracy in different countries and conditions of martial law. This method includes:
− Legislative Comparison: Analysis of legislative acts from different countries regulating martial law to
identify common features and differences in approaches to ensuring democratic processes.
− Historical Examples Comparison: Studying historical examples of martial law implementation in
different countries and analyzing the consequences for representative democracy.
− International Experience Analysis: Researching practices and recommendations of international
organizations, such as the UN, European Union, and others, regarding the functioning of democracy
during emergencies.
Logical Methods: These include analysis, synthesis, induction, and deduction, which allow for
systematizing knowledge and making substantiated conclusions. These methods include:
− Analysis: Decomposing the studied phenomenon into components for a deeper understanding of
specific aspects of representative democracy functioning during martial law.
− Synthesis: Combining separate elements of the study into a single concept, allowing for an overall
picture and systemic interconnections.
− Induction: Deriving general patterns based on the analysis of individual cases and empirical data.
− Deduction: Formulating specific hypotheses and conclusions based on general principles and theories
related to democracy and martial law.
Using these methods in combination allowed for conducting a comprehensive and deep study of
representative democracy under martial law, identifying its peculiarities, problems, and possible ways of
improvement.
Results and Discussion
Limitations of the Study
Lack of Access to Classified Information: The study may be limited by the inability to access classified or
sensitive information related to national security and government decision-making processes during martial
law. This could result in an incomplete understanding of the full impact of martial law on democratic
institutions and practices.
Difficulty in Assessing Long-Term Impact: Assessing the long-term impact of martial law on democracy
is challenging due to the ongoing nature of the conflict and the uncertainty about when and how martial
law will be lifted. The study may not be able to fully predict or evaluate the long-term consequences for
democratic processes and institutions.
Reliance on Theoretical and Comparative Analysis: The research relies heavily on theoretical frameworks
and comparative analysis, which may not capture the nuanced and dynamic realities on the ground. This
could limit the applicability of findings to the specific context of Ukraine.
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
165
h tt ps: //a mazoni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ IS S N 2322 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Potential Bias in Sources and Data: The study may be influenced by the availability and reliability of
sources, especially given the context of an ongoing conflict. Information from government and non-
governmental organizations may carry biases that affect the study's conclusions.
Challenges in Measuring Public Opinion: Accurately gauging public opinion and the level of public trust
in government decisions during wartime is difficult. The stress and instability caused by the conflict may
affect the reliability of survey data and other measures of public sentiment.
Impact of Displacement and Migration: The large-scale displacement and migration of Ukrainian citizens
due to the conflict complicate the assessment of democratic participation and representation. The study may
struggle to account for the political and social dynamics of displaced populations.
Legal and Constitutional Constraints: The study must navigate complex legal and constitutional constraints
that affect democratic procedures during martial law. These constraints may limit the scope of potential
reforms and adaptations to democratic practices.
Security Concerns: The ongoing security situation poses practical challenges for conducting research and
gathering data. This could result in gaps in information and hinder a comprehensive analysis of the impact
of martial law on democracy.
The value of democracy for the Ukrainian people is difficult to overestimate, as citizens have repeatedly
affirmed their right to participate in socio-political life in various ways. Even under the legal regime of
martial law, democratic values remain fundamental. The use of democratic methods in the management of
public affairs ensures the necessary level of public trust in the government, which is crucial for achieving
victory in the war. In addition, only under the conditions of a democratic system is there a possibility of
building a strong economy that can provide an adequate standard of living for all members of society. The
current economic development trends in Ukraine are characterized by the instability of the activity figures,
budget deficits, low efficiency of the economic, political, and social reforms, rise in the level of the
unprofitability of the enterprises, a high level of corruption, etc. (Kolomoiets, Tsybulnyk, Moroz,
Prymachenko, & Khashev, 2021). The war of annihilation waged by the Russian Federation against Ukraine
significantly exacerbates already existing economic problems. Thus, the preservation of democratic
approaches in the management of state affairs, even under conditions of war and a difficult economic
situation, is extremely important.
The main goal of democracy is to ensure and guarantee a high level of public trust in government decisions.
At the same time, the level of public support for the government is a key component of the state's resilience
to external and internal threats. Therefore, during wartime, the task of democracy does not lose its
importance. On the contrary, a high level of public support for government decisions is a guarantee of
achieving victory. The war may last for years, or possibly decades. Therefore, the issue of conducting
various democratic procedures under the legal regime of martial law, especially over time, despite the
legislator's opinion, is extremely important.
The principle of popular sovereignty is enshrined in Article 5 of the Constitution of Ukraine (Law No.
254к/96-VR, 1996). The academic community has developed a stable tripartite approach to its
understanding: the people are the bearers of sovereignty and the only source of power in Ukraine; the people
exercise power directly, as well as through state authorities and local self-government bodies; the people
are guaranteed the exclusive right to decide the most important issues of state and public life (Sadurski,
2019). The power of the people means not the power of an abstract community, but the involvement of
each citizen in its exercise.
Direct exercise of power is one of the main competencies of the Ukrainian people. The Law of Ukraine
"On the Legal Regime of Martial Law" defines martial law as a special legal regime introduced in the event
of armed aggression, threat of attack, or danger to the state independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
Typical forms of direct democracy, such as elections and referendums, can be implemented only under the
ordinary legal regime. Special legislative restrictions provided for in Article 19 of this Law make it
impossible to hold elections and referendums during martial law. An additional prohibition on holding
elections is contained in the Constitution, which stipulates that the term of office of the Verkhovna Rada of
166
h tt ps: // am az on ia in v es ti ga .i n fo/ I S S N 23 2 2 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Ukraine is extended until the day of the first meeting of the first session of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine
elected after the termination of martial law or a state of emergency (Law No. 389-VIII, 2015, Decree No.
64/2022, 2022, Law No. 2102-IX, 2022).
Therefore, the prohibition on holding elections during martial law is enshrined at the legislative level. The
Constitution of Ukraine is also unequivocal on this issue: in the event of the introduction of martial law or
a state of emergency, the fourth part of Article 83 provides for the extension of the powers of parliament
until the day of the first meeting of the first session of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine elected after the end
of martial law or a state of emergency. This wording does not allow for ambiguity – the parliament must
be elected only after the cancellation of martial law. Therefore, it can be argued that holding parliamentary
elections during martial law is unconstitutional (Law No. 254к/96-VR, 1996).
As Vodiannikov (2023) notes, although the Constitution cannot be amended during martial law, subordinate
acts may undergo changes. Therefore, if amendments are made to the electoral legislation allowing
elections during wartime, these changes will be valid until the Constitutional Court of Ukraine declares
them unconstitutional (presumption of constitutionality). Therefore, it is not possible to exclude the
possibility of adopting such a law, especially under increased international pressure. However, there
remains the question of whether free and fair elections can be held under the extreme conditions of war,
and whether the will of the people will truly be free, as required by Article 71 of the Constitution.
Overall, the establishment of special restrictions is since during the operation of a special legal regime, the
temporary restriction of constitutional rights and freedoms of individuals and citizens is allowed. At the
same time, the relevant state authorities, military command, military administrations, and local self-
government bodies are granted powers necessary to prevent threats, repel armed aggression, guarantee
national security, and eliminate the danger to the state independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
Among the numerous restrictions and management measures, there are no direct or even indirect references
to the possibility of limiting the principle of popular sovereignty, as understood in Article 5 of the
Constitution of Ukraine. In fact, all elements of this principle cannot be objects of interference (Opora,
2024). This fully confirms the need to find a balance between the temporary restriction of the possibility of
direct democracy and ensuring the continuous exercise of state power by the people, who are its only source
and bearers of sovereignty.
The Constitution of Ukraine enshrines the principle of a democratic state, according to which all power in
the state belongs to the people. This principle goes beyond mere elections and directly influences the
principle of free elections (Law No. 254к/96-VR, 1996). Elections ensure democratic legitimacy only when
they are free and fair. This means that not only must the voting process itself be free from coercion and
unlawful pressure, but voters' right to vote must not be restricted or canceled, and the entire electoral process
must be fair from start to finish. This is achieved through numerous constitutional guarantees of freedom
and equality, as well as institutional and procedural mechanisms (European Commission, 2023).
The dilemma of holding elections during wartime lies in choosing between two options:
1. Conducting elections that do not meet constitutional standards, or
2. Suspending the electoral process until the end of the war.
Another aspect of the principle of a democratic state must be taken into account: democracy means the self-
determination of the people. Self-determination is based on the idea of free, rational, and informed choice.
For democratic self-determination to be full-fledged, certain prerequisites are necessary, such as continuous
free discussion among various social forces, interests, and ideas (Office of the Council of Europe in
Ukraine, 2023).
During World War II, elections in Britain were suspended. At the end of the war, Churchill's support among
the British reached 83%. However, his party lost the post-war elections in 1945. This example shows that
democratic elections are won not because of past achievements, but based on the vision of the future. When
a nation is in extreme conditions threatening its existence, the primary instinct becomes survival and
returning to normal life, and the future in this context is not considered (Vodiannikov, 2023).
Problems that may arise during the organization and conduct of the electoral process include:
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
167
h tt ps: //a mazoni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ IS S N 2322 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
− Frequent air raid alerts will make reliable voting, vote counting, and election results impossible.
− Due to constant shelling, it will be impossible to provide equal voting conditions for all Ukrainians.
− Ukraine will not be able to guarantee equal access to voting for all citizens, as the voting process will
be associated with varying levels of risk and constant shelling across the country.
− Conducting elections immediately after the end of martial law will be impossible in the most affected
areas due to security issues, mined territories, destroyed polling stations, and outdated data in the State
Voter Register.
− Elections will not be able to provide sufficient democratic legitimacy due to the mass displacement of
Ukrainians who will not have the opportunity to vote, which may lead to the elections being declared
illegitimate.
− Ukrainian electoral legislation provides for personal voting, which will overload polling stations at
diplomatic and consular offices abroad.
− There is no electronic voting system in Ukraine, and the electoral code does not provide for
experiments or pilot projects for the introduction of innovative technologies.
− During the pre-election campaign, which may coincide with the period of martial law, it is necessary
to comply with security measures related to martial law (Andrushko, 2023).
Since February 24, 2022, more than 11 million Ukrainians have been forced to leave their country.
According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, as of early February 2023, almost 8
million Ukrainians are in European countries. At least 2.8 million Ukrainians were forced to move to the
aggressor country or were deported. The number of Ukrainian children abroad has decreased from 650-690
thousand at the beginning of the conflict to approximately 480-520 thousand by the end of 2022. This means
that about 10 million adult citizens who are voters are outside Ukraine (Afanasyeva, 2023).
Compared to the 2019 elections, when the number of Ukrainian voters abroad was about 410 thousand, the
figure is now 25 times larger. Organizing the voting of such a large number of voters abroad requires new
approaches and the creation of additional polling stations (UNIAN Information Agency, 2019).
Firstly, elections that are constitutionally questionable may undermine the legitimacy of not only the
process itself but also the elected parliament. Tens of thousands of Ukrainians on the front lines, as well as
those experiencing occupation or seeking refuge abroad, will feel deceived and alienated if they do not have
the opportunity to vote or run for office. This sense of injustice may create new divisions in Ukrainian
society, threatening post-war recovery.
Suspending martial law to hold elections will also not be positively received by the Ukrainian society.
Public anger could undermine the legitimacy of the new parliament, especially if the number of casualties
in the war increases after martial law is reinstated. Disillusionment with politicians may lead to a sense of
hopelessness in democratic institutions.
Secondly, war distorts rational choice and deepens social divisions. Although sociological research during
the war indicates unity and cohesion among the Ukrainian people, deep-seated differences remain,
especially after personal experiences of the war. These emotional aftershocks and collective post-traumatic
syndrome can lead to various scenarios of deteriorating overall psychological climate with corresponding
consequences for democratic development.
In mid-2022, the Central Election Commission approved proposals to improve Ukraine's legislation aimed
at preparing for and conducting elections after the cessation or termination of martial law in the country.
These proposals were sent to the Verkhovna Rada Committee on State Building, Local Self-Government,
Regional Development, and Urban Planning for further consideration and incorporation into the preparation
of relevant draft laws.
Consultative democracy is gaining special significance in modern conditions. Its essence lies in the fact
that the authorities are not obliged to consider the opinions of initiative groups, but at the same time, they
can involve a wide range of subjects in consultations, drawing the attention of officials and public
authorities to issues that, either by oversight or deliberately, have not received the necessary attention.
168
h tt ps: // am az on ia in v es ti ga .i n fo/ I S S N 23 2 2 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Therefore, despite the non-mandatory nature of consultative democracy, in cases where it causes public
resonance, local and state authorities usually take public opinion into account in their decisions.
Consultative democracy effectively draws attention to socially significant issues, and when these issues are
truly important, the authorities cannot ignore them.
Conclusion
− Representative democracy under martial law presents a complex problem that requires careful analysis
and strategy development. Based on the above, it was concluded that even under the challenging
conditions of martial law, democratic values and processes remain critically important for ensuring the
legitimacy and stability of the government.
− Martial law can lead to restrictions on representative democracy, such as the prohibition of elections
or the limitation of civil liberties. The conditions of military conflict require the adaptation of
democratic institutions and processes to new realities. This includes developing alternative
mechanisms for citizen participation and ensuring their voice in the decision-making process.
− An important stage is the development of political and social recovery strategies that contribute to the
return to the normal functioning of democratic institutions after the conflict ends. The conditions of
martial law create several problematic issues for representative democracy, but there are ways to solve
them:
− Martial law often accompanies the restriction of political rights and freedoms of citizens. This can
include censorship, a ban on elections, and restrictions on the rights to freedom of speech and
association. Solutions: It is important to maintain a minimum level of civil rights and freedoms,
ensuring access to information and the ability to express a civic position.
− The conditions of military conflict can disrupt the legitimacy of power structures, especially if they are
established or maintained as a result of a military coup. Solutions: It is important to uphold the rule of
law and develop mechanisms to return to legitimate democratic institutions.
− Martial law can undermine the development of civil society and threaten the independence of public
organizations. Solutions: It is necessary to support the work of civil society and ensure its independence
and protection from the influence of power structures.
− It is important to ensure citizen participation in decision-making, even under the challenging conditions
of military conflict. Solutions: Using alternative forms of citizen participation, such as public
discussions, petitions, and consultations, to ensure their voice in the governance process.
− Regarding options, it is more appropriate to suspend the electoral process. Even if martial law is lifted
to conduct elections and the electoral process begins, it will remain questionable from a constitutional
point of view and will likely contradict the core principles of the Constitution regarding a democratic
state and free elections. Wartime does not provide an environment where participants in the electoral
process can freely and fully express their views and will. Additionally, it does not guarantee that all
citizens, whether in the armed forces, seeking refuge abroad, or surviving under foreign occupation,
can actively participate in political life. Thus, the impossibility of holding elections during wartime
becomes a matter of both democracy and security.
Regarding further scientific research, it is necessary to consider which institutional mechanisms facilitate
or hinder the development of representative democracy under martial law, and to focus on analyzing
political and social recovery strategies after the war that contribute to the restoration of democratic
processes and the strengthening of democratic institutions.
Bibliographic References
Afanasyeva, M. A. (2023). Post-war elections in Ukraine: key issues and future challenges. In
Transformation of legal systems in armed conflict conditions. Odessa: Phoenix. Retrieved from
https://acortar.link/rsatt5
Andrushko, I. P. (2023). Problems of conducting elections during martial law. Legal Scientific Electronic
Journal, 9, 43-45. Retrieved from http://lsej.org.ua/9_2023/9.pdf
Buga, H. S. (2023). Public discussions under martial law. State and Regions, 3(81), 388-393. Retrieved
from https://acortar.link/SXNG36
Bugaric, B. (2019). Central Europe's descent into autocracy: A constitutional analysis of authoritarian
populism. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 17(2), 597-616. Retrieved from
https://acortar.link/QLvjPT
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
169
h tt ps: //a mazoni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ IS S N 2322 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Chyrkin, A., & Kyrychenko, Y. (2024). Fighting Ukrainian democracy in action. Center for Political and
Legal Reforms. Center for Political and Legal Reforms. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/sKpRbY
Decree No. 64/2022. On the Introduction of Martial in Ukraine. President of Ukraine, 2022. Retrieved
from https://www.president.gov.ua/documents/642022-41397
European Commission (2023). The annual rule of law cycle. European Commission. Retrieved from
https://acortar.link/56GaUP
Goshovska, V., Kisiel, I., Lukina, L., Gorulko, O., & Nehulevskyi, I. (2022). Desarrollo de valores
democráticos como base para la consolidación de la sociedad ucraniana moderna. Amazonia
Investiga, 11(57), 221-231. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2022.57.09.23
Kolomoiets, T., Tsybulnyk, N., Moroz, O., Prymachenko, V., & Khashev, V. (2021). Influence of Shadow
Economy Legalization on National Security of Ukraine. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues,
8(3), 420-437. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/6HWwRL
Law No. 2102-IX. On the Approval of the Presidential Decree “On the Introduction of Martial Law in
Ukraine”. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2022. Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2102-20#Text
Law No. 254к/96-VR. Constitution of Ukraine. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 1996. Retrieved from
https://acortar.link/2zidvq
Law No. 389-VIII. On the Legal Regime of Martial. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2015. Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/card/389-19
Mykhailov, M. (2022). Direct democracy under martial law: ways to realize the people's right to power.
Current Issues of Jurisprudence, 2(30), 13-18. Retrieved from https://acortar.link/Q4cKBF
Office of the Council of Europe in Ukraine. (2023). Use of local democracy tools under martial law.
Retrieved from https://acortar.link/zgl35y
Opora. (2024). Legitimacy of Ukrainian authorities in the conditions of impossibility of holding elections.
Retrieved from https://acortar.link/kVd2kD
Reilly, B. (2010). Post-conflict elections: constraints and dangers. International Peacekeeping, 1, 118-139.
Retrieved from https://acortar.link/hO4slf
Sadurski, W. (2019). Illiberal Democracy or Populist Authoritarianism? Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Retrieved from https://acortar.link/DQ1PUD
Sadurski, W. (2022). Introduction. In A Pandemic of Populists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Retrieved from https://acortar.link/SbLZow
Storozhenko, L., Ignatenko, O., Yaroshovets, T., Antypenko, I., & Vlasenko, V. (2023). E-democracy in
the context of the information society: prospects, challenges and opportunities. Amazonia
Investiga, 12(70), 63-77. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.70.10.6
Szostek, J., & Toremark, L. (2022). Democracy in Ukraine. Chatham House. Retrieved from
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2023/11/democracy-ukraine
UNIAN Information Agency. (2019). The MFA named the total number of Ukrainian voters abroad.
Retrieved from https://acortar.link/YMjvgp
Vodiannikov, O. (2023). Wartime Elections as Democratic Backsliding. Constitutional Blog. Retrieved
from https://acortar.link/txrInB