The practice of multiple citizenship exists, but has not yet been openly recognized in Ukraine: Natalia Naumenko

The issue of multiple citizenship in Ukraine has long been the subject of active public debate — on the one hand, millions of Ukrainians have gone abroad and are forced to integrate into new countries, on the other — Ukrainian legislation has not yet openly recognized the legitimacy of multiple citizenship. Against this background, the new draft law on multiple citizenship, which has already passed the first reading in the Verkhovna Rada, aroused wide interest. Head of the State Migration Service Natalia Naumenko explained the essence of future changes and commented on sensitive situations regarding the loss of citizenship, dual loyalty and the prospects of returning passports.

Naumenko stated that the prospect of the adoption of draft law No. 11469 is real, because it is one of the president’s priorities. She explained that the law for the first time legalizes the very term “multiple citizenship” in the legal field of Ukraine. Although in practice such a situation has existed for a long time, it has not been openly recognized until now. Now this status will become transparent and legal. At the same time, according to her, the very approach to multiple citizenship still causes an ambiguous attitude – both among people’s deputies and in society in general.

She noted that because of the war, many Ukrainians received citizenship of other countries to simplify life abroad — in particular, for reasons of employment. And this became one of the reasons why it is important to ensure legal certainty and protection for such persons. At the same time, Naumenko emphasized that Ukrainian legislation does not have the term “deprivation of citizenship”, but only the concept of “loss of citizenship”.

Commenting on the situations when foreign states – for example, Austria – demand withdrawal from Ukrainian citizenship in order to acquire their own, she noted that such examples are known, and the draft law will clearly define which countries’ citizenship can be combined with Ukrainian. At the same time, not all countries follow the same policy, and this, in her opinion, is normal.

Regarding the requirement to declare all citizenships for those running for public office, Naumenko emphasized that persons who make important decisions for the country must transparently report the presence of another citizenship. That is why the Migration Service supports entering such information into the Demographic Register. The Constitution does not prohibit this, but it is unacceptable from a moral point of view, she noted.

Using the example of a citizen of the Russian Federation who fought for Ukraine, submitted an application to renounce Russian citizenship and decided to run for parliament, Naumenko explained that legally he remains a citizen of Russia until he goes through the entire procedure of official withdrawal. She emphasized that the return of the passport does not mean the automatic loss of citizenship.

In addition, Naumenko gave an answer to the question whether a person can lose Ukrainian citizenship if he has several others.  Such a mechanism exists, loss is possible if the citizenship was acquired knowingly and voluntarily at the age of majority, and the authorized services have confirmation of this – for example, a statement or documentary evidence. At the same time, the mere fact of having another passport does not mean voluntary acquisition of citizenship. It is necessary to find out the circumstances and find clear legal evidence of a person’s conscious decision.

When asked about the demotivation of Ukrainians due to the public loss of citizenship, Naumenko admitted that such a trend does exist. She noted that no one keeps track of the number of citizenships each person has, and many Ukrainians — particularly in the west of the country — have second passports.

As for the cases when the child was born in the USA and automatically received American citizenship, she explained that this cannot be a reason for the loss of Ukrainian citizenship if the parents are Ukrainians. Similarly, if a woman acquires her husband’s citizenship automatically, this is not considered a voluntary acquisition, and the loss of Ukrainian citizenship does not occur.

Speaking about possible political manipulations, Naumenko assured that the draft law includes a list of countries whose citizenship can be recognized in combination with Ukrainian. And if the foreign citizenship corresponds to this list, there are no grounds for losing the Ukrainian passport.

As for those who have already been deprived of citizenship, she stated that all such cases can be resolved in court. If, after the adoption of the law, a citizen with another citizenship, recognized in the new law, wants to return Ukrainian citizenship, such an opportunity will be provided. Using the example of Cyprus, Naumenko confirmed that a person who previously lost Ukrainian citizenship due to the acquisition of Cypriot citizenship will be able to renew it if Cyprus enters the list of permitted countries.

Separately, she commented on the situation with the residents of the occupied Crimea, who received Russian passports against their will. Ukraine does not recognize such citizenship, it is a forced passporting, but this issue has not yet been finally settled. There are examples when children from Crimea who came to enroll in Ukrainian universities were forced to present Russian passports in order to receive a certificate or leave the occupied territory. In such cases, the state should not demand an official renunciation of Russian citizenship, since it was not acquired voluntarily. She also confirmed that there are many such children and separate educational programs are in place for them.

Commenting on the problem of illegal migration, Naumenko noted that the main part of illegal migrants has been in Ukraine since pre-war times — these are, in particular, students from Africa who could not leave or obtain legal status. Some of them deliberately stayed in Ukraine for patriotic reasons.

Nataliya Naumenko reported that 8,308 illegal migrants were detected in 2021, while 3,058 were detected in 2024. She emphasized that it is difficult and incorrect to compare these figures with the pre-war period, since the full-scale war radically changed migration flows, destroyed logistical routes and led to the mass departure of both Ukrainians and foreigners who were in the territory of Ukraine legally. The mentioned figures, according to her, reflect only the statistics of detected cases, recorded by units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

As for the Roma, Naumenko said that they are not migrants, but citizens of Ukraine who still have not settled their legal status and do not have documents. She explained that the issue is not in the possibility, but in the desire of such persons to draw up documents, as this means not only the acquisition of rights, but also obligations. According to her, at the beginning of the full-scale war, many Roma applied for passports precisely for the purpose of going abroad, which became a serious problem for the Czech Republic and Hungary, where entire communities of Roma arrived with Ukrainian documents, demanding temporary protection. She noted that in response to the requests of the authorities of these countries, Ukraine was ready to accept back persons with valid Ukrainian passports under the readmission procedure.

Commenting on the case of a Japanese man who came to Kharkiv, Naumenko explained that he was initially in Ukraine legally on a tourist visa, later received an extension of his stay, but after the termination of cooperation with the organization that accompanied him, he remained in the country for almost a year without obtaining documents. She denied the allegation that the migration service refused to issue him a permit and emphasized that after public publicity, the man was invited to the migration service, and during the meeting he confirmed that he did not apply to the service himself. When asked why he claimed the opposite, he answered: “Someone told me that they wouldn’t give anything anyway.”

When asked about the status of military migrants, Naumenko said that the service understands their situation and supports their legalization as much as possible. She explained that the military card is equivalent to a temporary residence permit, but noted that there are cases when foreigners, after signing a contract, refuse to perform combat tasks and terminate the contract at their own will. In such situations, according to her, there are no grounds for further processing of documents. She cited the example of the National Guard, where 184 foreigners currently serve, of which 42 terminated their contracts in the first two months. Problems with documents arise only for those who stopped the service of their own volition, and not for objective reasons, such as injuries.

Naumenko also reported that Ukrainian legislation stipulates that a foreigner who has signed a three-year contract and fulfilled its terms has the right to an immigration permit or even citizenship.

As for foreigners from the Russian Federation or Belarus who served in the Armed Forces, were wounded and do not see themselves in Ukraine, Naumenko admitted that this is a problem, because such people may seek to go abroad. She recalled the case when Polish border guards detained such a foreigner who was trying to apply for refugee status. The Polish side reported that these individuals are considered potentially risky from the point of view of national security.

Naumenko also spoke about the appeal for a citizen of Belarus, who fought in the Ukrainian battalion for two years, and her husband went missing at the front. She did not receive confirmation of her disappearance from the Ministry of Defense and refused the proposed refugee status or additional protection, instead insisting on receiving a document that would allow her to legally cross the border and submit documents to the EU. According to Naumenko, the migration service had no reason to issue such a document, as the applicant refused the opportunities provided for by Ukrainian legislation.

Naumenko believes that there will be more and more such cases, so Ukraine needs to develop a comprehensive state policy of interaction with foreign volunteers, which will include not only their rights, but also their duties. She emphasized that the granting of legal status is only a small part of the overall system: social guarantees, access to medicine, education, housing, and integration programs should follow. Otherwise, legalization will remain only a formality that does not solve anything in the long run.

Commenting on the topic of attracting foreign labor, Naumenko expressed skepticism. She believes that before forming such a policy, it is necessary to first assess the real needs of the labor market, to guarantee the employment of Ukrainians who will return from abroad or from the war, in particular, veterans. She also emphasized the need for accountability on the part of large employers who favor the importation of migrant workers. These people have vital needs, and if they are not taken care of, the situation will become problematic.

Naumenko noted that the motivation of foreign workers is unpredictable: if they find higher pay elsewhere, they will leave. In such cases, the return of these individuals to their country of origin will be almost impossible, as some states, such as Bangladesh, do not facilitate repatriation and do not identify their nationals.

Commenting on the decision to allow men of draft age to issue passports abroad without the mandatory presence of a military registration document, Naumenko said that she does not see this as a threat. She noted that as a mobilization resource, these citizens have already been lost, but as an economic resource, they can still be involved after the war. She emphasized that the main value is that after the victory these men return, create families, work and support the economy.

Naumenko believes that issuing passports abroad is an important step that provides an opportunity to maintain a citizen’s connection with the state. She emphasized that it was possible to do this thanks to the support of the President, the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Defense.

Regarding the cases of corruption in the structure of the Social Security Administration, Naumenko stated that she does not idealize the system and recognizes the existence of such cases. She cited low wages and the personal moral choice of each employee as the reasons for corruption. She noted that the system does not have the possibility of issuing VIP passports, the fastest deadline is seven days, and in exceptional situations, three or even one day.