Head of State Migration Service Nataliia Naumenko: "As of today, law does not require person to disclose and declare another citizenship"
After the adoption of the bill on multiple citizenship, a number of issues remain open. Which countries’ passports will Ukrainians be able to obtain? In which country will those who acquire another citizenship be required to perform military service? Where will such individuals receive social assistance and pensions, and where will they pay taxes?
Will those who already held multiple passports of different states (in addition to the Ukrainian one) before the adoption of this law finally be required to report it to the Ukrainian authorities? Will people who left for the European Union during the war be able to obtain EU passports?
To find answers to these questions, we turned to the Head of the State Migration Service, Nataliia Naumenko.
"NOT ALL EU COUNTRIES RECOGNIZE MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIP"
– Even after the adoption of the law on multiple citizenship, debates over its unconstitutionality continued. Nevertheless, it has already been signed by the president. How much time will it take to ensure its implementation?
– The issue of multiple citizenship and its compliance with the Constitution has been under discussion for several years, as there had been previous draft laws on this matter. At the same time, the MPs who signed the submission to the Constitutional Court concerning the unconstitutionality of this provision also voted to broaden the provision on multiple citizenship by allowing certain categories of persons to submit declarations — service members; individuals who have rendered outstanding service to Ukraine; or those whose admission to citizenship is deemed to be in the national interest.
As for Article 4 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which is often cited in this debate. The concept laid down at the time of its adoption has nothing to do with multiple citizenship. It relates to administrative and territorial units. What was meant is that no region of Ukraine can have its own separate citizenship, for example, there cannot be citizenship of Crimea, the Donetsk region, and so on. The provision establishes that there is only one recognized citizenship: the citizenship of Ukraine.
As for the implementation of this law, its final provisions state that it will enter into force six months after being signed. In practice, the government and our service have that amount of time to develop the procedures and bring other regulatory acts in line with the law.
The key novelty of this law is that the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine will determine the list of countries with which multiple citizenship is possible. This will likely be the most pivotal point in implementing the law, and it will almost certainly become the focus of debate.
– Is there already a preliminary list of such countries?
– A preliminary list was discussed more than once during the drafting of the bill. These are European Union countries and NATO member states, with G7 countries sometimes added. But what it will look like in the final version remains to be seen.
From our perspective, these should be countries that support Ukraine’s sovereignty, oppose this war, and the Russian Federation.
The law stipulates that, when forming this list, the Cabinet of Ministers must take into account that these countries are members of the European Union and also consider whether they supported the sanctions imposed against Russia.
By a separate order, the Cabinet of Ministers must designate which authority will be primarily responsible for compiling such a list.
– When this law was being discussed, one of the main objectives was said to be to bring back Ukrainians who had previously renounced their citizenship, or to give them the opportunity to retain Ukrainian citizenship if they wish to acquire citizenship of other European countries. Is there currently any data on how many Ukrainians who left during the war have already obtained citizenship of other states?
– To obtain citizenship of a European Union country, one must go through rather complex and lengthy procedures. There must also be legal grounds that justify why a person may obtain it. For example, by origin, through marriage to an EU citizen, or a long period of permanent residence in EU territory. In most countries, this is 5–7 years.
At the same time, one must pass exams on knowledge of history, language, culture, and so forth.
Those Ukrainians who left earlier and married EU citizens gained this right. Some have already renounced Ukrainian citizenship, while others are in the process of doing so. But these are not numbers that would significantly affect the demographic situation.
Do the 4.5 million of our citizens who are currently in EU countries have the right to obtain citizenship there now? I believe 95% do not. Therefore, we are unlikely to see any particular trend here either.
The law is aimed more at the historical connection with the diaspora in Canada, the United States, France, and other countries. In other words, it concerns the descendants of ethnic Ukrainians who left our country long ago. These are people who want to have Ukrainian citizenship but do not want to renounce the citizenship of the country where they were born and have lived their entire lives, and with which they also identify themselves.
They already had the right to obtain Ukrainian citizenship, but in most cases, they were required to renounce the citizenship of the country they held. Now they will be able to retain another citizenship.
However, it must also be taken into account that not all EU countries recognize multiple citizenship. And if a Ukrainian citizen wishes to acquire the citizenship of such a European Union country, they will face a choice.
– Do the United States and Canada recognize it?
– Yes, they do.
– Do you communicate with representatives of the diaspora? How did they react to this law?
– The Ukrainian World Congress was deeply involved in the preparation of this bill. At times, we had rather difficult discussions regarding the provisions it contains. They worked at all stages with the President’s Office and with the Verkhovna Rada. From what we see now and from what they publish in their press releases, we can say that, overall, they view the law positively.
– What was the main point of contention?
– The Migration Service proposed excluding from the law the provision set out in Article 8, which concerns the acquisition of citizenship by territorial origin. This refers to foreigners or stateless persons who themselves resided on the territory of Ukraine, or whose close relatives lived here before 1991. Our position was that those who wanted to obtain citizenship already have it.
The problem lies in how to find documentary proof that, before 1991, a person was registered and resided in the territory of Ukraine if they did not hold citizenship. We have previously encountered numerous forged and compiled documents.
The difficulty was that it could be not only the person themselves who had lived here, but also their grandfather, grandmother, great-grandfather, or great-grandmother. When it involves three generations, what kind of supporting documents can a person provide?
Establishing such facts of permanent residence on the territory of Ukraine before 1991 was done by court judgments. They would take into account witnesses of unclear status who claimed they purportedly knew the person and that he or she resided in Ukraine. And when we started to look into it, it turned out to be, shall we say, merely a compilation of certain facts. Nevertheless, we were obliged to enforce the court’s judgment.
Therefore, there were issues here, and we proposed excluding such provisions. In our view, they entail risks to national security. However, for now they remain in place.
Going forward, we will analyze practice and, if necessary, put forward proposals to improve the legislation.
– What risks are we talking about? Do you mean that some Russians might try to obtain Ukrainian citizenship in this way?
– Not only Russians. There have been cases where thieves-in-law, criminal kingpins, and individuals on international wanted lists tried to legalize their status through a court judgment, on the pretext that their grandfather or grandmother had resided on the territory of Ukraine. We try to block such cases.
I am not saying such instances are widespread, but they do pose a risk.
– How will ethnic Ukrainians who were born abroad and hold the citizenship of another country be able to obtain Ukrainian citizenship?
– Exactly the same way as now. The procedure does not change significantly. They must provide a certain set of documents confirming a historical connection with Ukraine. These can be submitted through consular offices abroad. They must undergo checks and procedures, as well as pass an examination on knowledge of Ukrainian history, the Ukrainian language, and the Constitution.
The procedure and location for taking the exam have not yet been determined. These will be defined by procedural regulations.
The same applies by birth. If their grandfather or grandmother was born on the territory of Ukraine, they have the right to obtain citizenship.
– Do you expect a large influx of applicants?
– The diaspora says there is an influx of those interested. How it will actually turn out will be shown in the first year or two of the law’s implementation.
– Will people who renounced Ukrainian citizenship in order to obtain the citizenship of another state be able to restore it?
– The possibility of reinstatement existed before and remains now.
– Do people who did not renounce Ukrainian citizenship but somehow obtained passports of other states have to report this to the Migration Service?
– If they are civil servants or equivalent to them and file an annual declaration with the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP), there is a requirement in it to declare the possession of citizenship of another state.
– And if they are not civil servants and do not file declarations? Do they have to report it?
– As of today, the law does not require a person to disclose and declare another citizenship. I believe this will be regulated by another law or by procedures during the implementation of the law we are discussing.
The law itself does not contain any provisions of a social nature regarding other areas of public life. It is purely procedural. In other words, it regulates who has the right to what, and which set of documents must be submitted. But how it will correlate with other areas of public life is a matter to be regulated by other laws.
"THE LAW DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE CREATION OF A SEPARATE REGISTER OF MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIP"
– Is there a procedure for the exchange of information between states regarding the acquisition of citizenship? Does the Migration Service receive data on which Ukrainians hold passports of other countries?
– No, there is no such exchange, because everything related to the acquisition or loss of citizenship is a matter of personal data protection. And if the State of Ukraine submits a request to the competent authorities of another state asking for information on whether a person holds its citizenship, the usual response is that the person has not consented to the processing of personal data in this area, and therefore, the information is not provided.
– Let’s talk about obligations. If a person holds not only Ukrainian citizenship but also that of another state, where are they required to perform military service? And what if the person has already served?
– The Law on Military Duty and Military Service contains specific provisions stating that a man who has acquired Ukrainian citizenship and has already completed military service in the state from which he arrived is not required to perform the service that is mandatory for men in peacetime in Ukraine. This does not apply to wartime and mobilization. How this will operate during the war is to be determined by the Ministry of Defense.
– And in which country must a person pay taxes if they have multiple citizenships?
– This is probably simpler, because there are the concepts of resident and non-resident. It all depends on how long you reside in a given country. That is, if you reside for more than 180 days and are a tax resident, you must pay taxes there. If you live in another country, then there. However, I think consultations will be needed with other countries regarding double taxation. But that is not within the competence of our Service.
– And what about social assistance? Which country should provide it? For example, if a person has Ukrainian citizenship but lives in the United States.
– This is a matter for the Ministry of Social Policy and the Pension Fund. They must determine how pension insurance and social insurance will be structured.
– The same question applies to medical care. Will it be provided free of charge if a person has multiple citizenship?
– It must be provided. But pension benefits, social payments related to childbirth, or in the event of an accident will depend on the policy established by the authority responsible for these matters.
– Does the law restrict civil servants from holding any citizenship other than Ukrainian?
– The law on multiple citizenship in no way affects other areas of public life, as I have already said. But the Law on Civil Service does indeed restrict civil servants, because they must be exclusively citizens of Ukraine. This was another subject of heated debate and discussion, including with the Ukrainian World Congress. They insist that Ukrainians living abroad who acquire Ukrainian citizenship should have access to any sphere of public life, including access to the civil service.
We are not saying that we see very deep risks here, but risks do exist. This is because civil service is, in some cases, connected with access to state secrets.
How to ensure security in this area is a matter for the Security Service of Ukraine, which will also determine what steps we take if the Law on Civil Service is amended. After all, it is the SSU that decides who is granted access to state secrets.
– Will there be a register of people with multiple citizenship?
– As of today, the law does not provide for the creation of a separate register on multiple citizenship. However, a declarant must indicate in their declaration all citizenships and passports they hold. And if a person provides false information, that already entails administrative liability. The circle of declarants in our system is quite broad.
– How should situations be handled where a person holds citizenship of the Russian Federation but resides in Ukraine and wishes to obtain Ukrainian citizenship? After all, it is currently impossible to verify whether they have truly renounced citizenship of the aggressor state.
– Not all citizens of the Russian Federation are required to renounce that citizenship. For example, if you are a servicemember of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and fought for our country, you submit a declaration renouncing Russian Federation citizenship along with documents to obtain Ukrainian citizenship. And although de facto and de jure, you remain a citizen of the Russian Federation, Ukraine will subsequently recognize only your Ukrainian citizenship. We understand that they cannot travel there and complete the full procedure. It is their personal choice. And they have already chosen Ukraine as the country where they want to live further.
As for your question on how this can be verified, let me put it this way: we have powerful security agencies, the Security Service of Ukraine and the Foreign Intelligence Service, which are currently successfully handling this task. They have the tools, primarily covert ones, to verify whether a person holds the citizenship of the aggressor state or is an accomplice of the enemy. For us, this means the Russian Federation and Belarus. They carry out these checks and provide us with this information.
In fact, during wartime, we have a moratorium on granting Ukrainian citizenship to citizens of the Russian Federation, we do not admit them. The only exceptions are certain categories of persons: those who fought for Ukraine, members of their families, individuals with outstanding service to Ukraine and their spouses, as well as those awarded a state decoration of Ukraine during their contracted military service.
– Can prisoners of war apply for Ukrainian citizenship if they declare that they no longer wish to serve in the Russian army or live in Russia?
– Many of them have raised the issue of applying for refugee status, but there is the Geneva Convention on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, and they are protected by it. That is the end of it, period. They have no other status than that of prisoners of war.
– How many foreign servicemen have applied for Ukrainian citizenship during the full-scale war?
– Not many, around 40–50 individuals.
– In the temporarily occupied territories, people are being issued passports of the Russian Federation. Do they still remain Ukrainian citizens in this case?
– The Law on Temporarily Occupied Territories clearly states that Ukraine does not recognize the forced passportization carried out by the Russian Federation. All citizens who resided there at the time of occupation are citizens of Ukraine. Their children, who are born there, are also citizens of Ukraine.
Law enforcement authorities may have questions for them regarding collaborationist activities. But that is another matter, unrelated to citizenship. People living in the temporarily occupied territories were and will remain citizens of Ukraine. And the state recognizes them as its citizens.
We all understand that people obtained passports because they had no other way to survive under occupation. However, if a person obtained a Russian Federation passport and supports Russia in this aggressive war, approves of the attack on Ukraine, or works in the occupation authorities, there will be consequences. If their actions after obtaining a Russian passport pose a threat to Ukraine’s national security, and this is established by the security services, this may serve as grounds for loss of Ukrainian citizenship. Because in such a case, the passport was not obtained under duress, but taken voluntarily and knowingly. And now the person supports the Russian Federation as a state that has invaded Ukraine.
But this does not mean automatic deprivation of citizenship; there are relevant procedures: evidence is collected, conclusions are drawn, and only after that is a decision on loss of citizenship made.
In the overwhelming majority of cases, we understand that people obtained these documents solely in order to survive. Quite often, through the Ombudsman or via our official email, we receive appeals from people who report that they were forced to obtain Russian passports and ask that this be considered forced passportization.
– If a person did not remain in the temporarily occupied territory but left for Russia and obtained a Russian passport there, do they still retain Ukrainian citizenship?
– In this case, voluntariness is clearly evident, so this is an entirely different matter. You did not simply leave and receive a passport; you went through the procedure. Under occupation, there was mass passportization without following the procedure of acquiring Russian Federation citizenship, and people were forced to receive passports automatically. But when you move to the territory of the Russian Federation and want to obtain a passport there, you must consciously submit an application stating that you request Russian citizenship. This is what happened, for example, with Ani Lorak. She went through the procedure of acquiring Russian Federation citizenship.
"TO REDUCE THE LEVEL OF CORRUPTION, WE HAVE DIGITIZED EVERYTHING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE"
– Last year in the Odesa region, the counterintelligence of the Security Service of Ukraine, together with the State Migration Service, dismantled a large-scale scheme of draft evasion. The head of a local district office of the SMS and two of his subordinates, as well as an official of the regional branch of the Administrative Services Center, were detained. According to the SSU, it was a corruption scheme for receiving money from men of conscription age who were abroad and tried to remotely obtain foreign passports. At what stage did you notice that something was happening in the Odesa region?
– We noticed it at the very first stage. Any fraudulent activity in the system will be detected quickly, because we also work within it, monitoring who is applying, what they are applying for, and how. We see spikes of activity. That was the case this time as well. In fact, we uncovered this scheme almost simultaneously with law enforcement agencies.
– Can you elaborate on what exactly you noticed?
– We have photography standards. We check whether the inspector photographed the person correctly, whether it meets our standards, whether there is any shadow, whether the photos are scanned images, and so on. All this already takes place at the level of the central office. There is a special unit here that monitors everything. And we established that there were certain risks. The photos were of poor quality, some appeared to be template-based, and part of them had been scanned.
In fact, we monitored every day and recorded this as a violation. And when we became certain that the photos did not meet the standards, we began checking people’s signatures and fingerprints, which are submitted every time a passport is issued.
Each time, fingerprint templates remain in the system. So when we saw that the templates of the same people differed at different times, we realized that something was wrong. We compiled a list of individuals with such discrepancies and non-standard photographs. And when we reported this situation to the minister, he ordered checks across the country. Together with the border guards, we verified whether people who were issued foreign passports were actually in Ukraine. Then we filtered out a certain set of data. After that, we worked with law enforcement. As a result of joint actions, it was established that the violations were not occurring nationwide but in a specific region. Passports were being issued without people.
– And how exactly did they do this?
– Through intermediaries, they sent a package of documents with a large-sized photograph to an inspector of the Migration Service. There, the photo was re-shot in a large format with fairly good resolution, and then the passport was issued.
We checked the entire chain to determine whether employees of the central office or the state printing enterprise "Ukraina" were involved.
– Was anyone from them involved in this scheme?
– No. It turned out this scheme was local.
– And how was payment made for such a service?
– That is a question for law enforcement. We did not go into such details. For us, it was important to shut down this scheme.
– So, if I understand correctly, these passports were made for men who had gone abroad and could not officially submit documents?
– Yes, precisely for such men.
– It is unlikely that any of the participants in the scheme expected that the quality of the photographs would expose them.
– We do not know what they were thinking. In general, we constantly remind our staff that the system is "alive," it is being improved, and safeguards are put in place to help identify shortcomings and violations. And such things will be detected. Identifying these kinds of offenses is only a matter of time.
– Do corruption schemes that employees of the Migration Service try to "profit" from change over the years? Are there the most common ones?
– Corruption, like any form of intellectual or technical activity, will not stand still. We will eliminate some types of schemes, and over time, others may appear. And then we will fight against those as well.
To reduce the level of corruption, we have digitized everything as much as possible, including paper archives and citizenship files. Now we will be scanning files on foreigners as well.
Secondly, legislation is constantly being improved. Thirdly, we try to work with people, but that is probably the most painful problem. How can corruption really be eradicated? It cannot be done only with a constant "stick". It also requires individual awareness. And the "carrot" can be benefits such as decent wages, fair bonuses, and opportunities for personal development within the system. Unfortunately, the situation in the country makes it difficult to provide adequate salaries. And when an inspector earns 12,000 hryvnias, can we really talk about young people who know languages feeling comfortable in this system?
Over the past year, we have had a tremendous outflow of personnel. After the civil service reform, salaries were reduced by half. We are unable to provide incentive payments. As a result, out of 6,000 staff members, about 1,000 left in a year, and new people do not want to join us. Considering that 70% of the Migration Service staff are women, under martial law, it is much easier for them to resign, take their children, and go abroad. Because there, social assistance is greater than the salary here. We state this honestly. But it means the outflow of qualified personnel. And young people, as I have already said, are not in a hurry to fill the vacant positions.
Thus, on the one hand, we are doing everything to reduce the level of corruption, and we are succeeding. On the other hand, the issue of what we call "everyday corruption" remains. We dismantle schemes and improve the system so that it cannot be deceived, yet someone may still approach an inspector, slip something in an envelope to speed things up, or to make them "turn a blind eye" to something. From what law enforcement agencies uncover, we see what people pay for: expediting the issuance of a foreign passport or creating an artificial obstacle for a foreigner. Unfortunately, such problems exist, and we are trying to find solutions.
In addition, sometimes corruption is driven by citizens themselves. Why try to expedite something when one can simply read the legally prescribed timeframe for the service and wait? It will not take longer than the law provides.
– How do you respond to journalistic investigations when it comes to the heads of regional departments?
– It depends. Because the stories themselves can also be different. For me, issues of personal life, family, and property status are matters that should be handled exclusively by law enforcement agencies or the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP). They should not enter the public domain. Because only these bodies can be provided with documents explaining how I acquired an apartment or a car. They can also calculate my income. I am speaking about myself here. I don’t own restaurants, bars, hotels, airplanes, or anything of that sort (smiles – ed.). I know how much money I have in my account, where I got the apartment I live in now, and so on.
– Last year, the State Bureau of Investigation reported suspicion against the head of a regional office of the State Migration Service of Ukraine for obstructing the lawful professional activities of journalists. This was announced by the Bureau’s press service. The statement also noted that, according to the investigation, in July 2024, journalists from one of the news agencies, while performing their professional duties, arrived at a hotel and entertainment complex in the Ivano-Frankivsk region to obtain a comment from the official regarding the assets of his family members. I will quote: "They introduced themselves and, holding a microphone with the agency’s name on it and a video camera, began filming. The suspect did not answer the journalists’ questions and deliberately struck the video camera held by the operator with his hand, damaging it. In cases like this, do you initiate internal investigations or refer the matter to the NACP to have them check your employee?
– In this case, the story has a slightly different context. We are not talking about a person’s assets and how they were acquired, because that is not a matter for the State Migration Service. That is a matter for the NACP. We have no authority to investigate where an employee’s property came from. But here it was about proper communication with journalists. And I asked the head of the department why he could not simply have spoken calmly, why it was necessary to create this incident. After all, you can calmly explain that determining whether property was lawfully acquired is within the competence of the NACP or law enforcement authorities, if you do not wish to comment further. Everyone reacts in their own way as a person. But communication with the public concerns you as an official. Therefore, we initiated an internal investigation into this incident and suspended the head of that department from his duties during the investigation, since this is already a matter of ethical conduct of a civil servant.
As for the issue of an official’s property or that of their relatives, the State Migration Service has no such powers and cannot conduct such checks. When a person submits a declaration, we can see what is stated there, but we have neither the powers nor the capacity to investigate whether someone has hidden assets. That too is within the competence of the relevant law enforcement authorities.
In general, when a person is appointed to a civil service position, a verification process is carried out, during which requests are sent to all relevant bodies — the NACP, the National Police, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Health, and others. As part of this check, among other things, the declaration and sources of income are reviewed, and a conclusion is issued as to whether the person meets integrity criteria or whether there are discrepancies between the declaration and their lifestyle.
If the verification confirms there are no discrepancies, what am I supposed to do? I do not conduct an additional review. That conclusion is added to the personal file, and then the person is appointed to the position.
– Have there been cases where everything seemed fine at the stage of such verification, but later law enforcement raised questions about illicit enrichment? How common are such cases?
– Such cases are not numerous. The minister instructed all relevant agencies to conduct deeper checks of those being appointed to positions. As I understand it, the President has now intensified this issue. The NACP and the State Bureau of Investigation are conducting more thorough inspections, especially when it comes to high-ranking positions.
– Was your Service affected by the decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine of October 22, 2024, enacted by Presidential decree, which concerns countering corruption and other offenses in the process of granting disability status to officials of state bodies?
– It affected all agencies. We collected information from the regions and provided it to the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
– Another scandal was linked to the office of the Migration Service in Kyiv and the Kyiv region. Publications and videos appeared online alleging schemes that supposedly helped Russians legalize their status here and leave for Europe. There were also claims about issuing documents to members of the criminal underworld. In addition, it was said that this person was allegedly carrying out tasks for one of the sanctioned oligarchs. Can you comment on this?
– The head of the office cannot, by definition, carry out any tasks from a person under sanctions related to the powers of the State Migration Service. This is because he cannot make independent decisions concerning the authority of the Migration Service.
As for issuing documents to members of the criminal underworld, that is a very strange story altogether. We investigated this. The head of the Migration Service office in Kyiv was, in fact, the very person who canceled all the illegally issued documents for that criminal underworld.
– Issued by whom?
– By previous heads of that office or in other regions. So this is a manipulation of facts. When you start looking into it, you see by whom, in which region, and when a person was documented. And it has nothing to do with the tenure of the current head of the Kyiv Migration Service office.
And thirdly, regarding the documentation of Russians. If I am not mistaken, the claim was about the head’s alleged influence on court decisions concerning Russians. This is a ridiculous story. It is strange to suggest that the head of any agency could influence court decisions.
We have repeatedly analyzed court rulings issued by Ukrainian courts concerning citizens of the Russian Federation. It would be inappropriate for me to comment on them, I will only say that some of them you just can’t get your head around. There is no legal substance to speak of at all.
As for court rulings issued in Kyiv, we have also analyzed them. First, there are not many of them. Second, there is not a single ruling that could raise doubts about any external influence over those decisions.
We try to keep court rulings under control, particularly in cases related to the Russian Federation, declarations, citizenship, and so on. We strive to substantiate the state’s position as much as possible when filing an appeal or deciding against an appeal. The goal is to ensure that all such rulings are as lawful as possible, leaving no questions later on, neither to the agency nor to the state.
– And the rulings you criticize, what exactly are they about?
– About establishing the fact of residence on the territory of Ukraine as of 1991. In my view, all those citizens who wanted to establish this fact could have done so long ago and obtained Ukrainian citizenship.
We also have some "remarkable" court rulings concerning the establishment of family ties or paternity. For example, a father, a citizen of Bangladesh, who has never lived in Ukraine. He now has a son, 40 years old, and a 60-year-old mother of that son, who have never left Ukraine. Yet the court establishes paternity.
And the third category of cases is when we fight against accepting declarations of renunciation of Russian Federation citizenship. These are citizens of the Russian Federation who acquired Ukrainian citizenship and were documented with temporary certificates of a Ukrainian citizen, but did not want to fulfill their obligations and properly go through the procedure of renouncing Russian citizenship. I am not talking now about servicemen or their family members. These are ordinary cases. Because people were simply too lazy to do it, or for some other reasons, or they wanted to "sit on two chairs", to hold the passports of both states. And now they go to court, and for some reason the courts side with them, obliging us to accept their declaration of renunciation of Russian Federation citizenship. We see a risk here. And at every judicial level we say: this means you are consciously allowing people to retain two passports, a Russian Federation passport and a Ukrainian citizen’s passport. They do not renounce their Russian passport. As far as I am concerned, this is a serious problem for the country.
– You mentioned that documents issued to members of the criminal underworld were canceled. How does that work? Do law enforcement agencies approach the Migration Service?
– We have a system for monitoring the issuance of documents. Sometimes law enforcement agencies do approach us for verification, this includes the Strategic Investigations Department of the National Police and the SSU. But there are also cases where we conduct checks ourselves. We have a procedure for remote verification of certain cases. This is when we request a set of files and check across all regions whether the decisions were made lawfully. Either before the decision is issued or afterward. And if we see that something is not being done in accordance with the law, we initiate the procedure for canceling the documents. Similar monitoring has been introduced in all regional offices of the Migration Service. In fact, they carry out self-checks over a certain period of time.
Tetiana Bodnia, Censor.NET
