Russia’s full-scale invasion profoundly reshaped the work of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Between 2022 and 2025, Parliament operated under unprecedented security pressures while simultaneously advancing major reforms, ensuring legislative continuity, and sustaining Ukraine’s EU-integration trajectory. Across all functional dimensions — transparency, legislative adaptation to the EU acquis, and political oversight of the executive — the Rada demonstrated institutional resilience but faced structural limitations exacerbated by wartime governance.

At the onset of martial law, transparency decreased as plenary sessions became closed, broadcasting and transcripts were suspended, and journalists were barred from the parliamentary premises. Yet Parliament continued publishing draft laws, voting data, and transcripts post-factum, preserving a minimum level of informational openness. From late 2023 onward, transparency gradually improved: Question Time to the Government resumed, committee communication practices became more systematic, explanatory materials on adopted laws increased, and restricted zones in the government quarter were reduced. A watershed moment came in May 2024, when accredited journalists regained limited access to the main parliamentary building for the first time since February 2022 — an important milestone for public accountability. At the same time, transparency remains uneven. Committee practices vary widely, accelerated procedures continue to constrain scrutiny, and major transparency reforms — including the 2025 law mandating open committee meetings — remain blocked due to a presidential “pocket veto.”

Despite the war, Ukraine’s EU-integration agenda intensified. The Committee on Ukraine’s Integration into the EU and newly created subcommittees in sectoral committees expanded compliance reviews, while strategic planning instruments — annual legislative plans, EU-flag designations, conformity tables, and official translations — became more systematic. Legislative output grew: between 2019 and 2025, 206 EU-integration draft laws were registered, with 88 adopted. Yet the absence of a dedicated special procedure produced two opposite problems: prolonged stagnation of some core reforms (e.g., SBU reform, justice sector initiatives) and hasty adoption of others without respecting procedural safeguards. Ongoing legislative efforts (Draft Laws Nos. 8242, 13653, 13653-1) aim to introduce a coherent procedure for EU-integration bills, standardise accompanying documents, and strengthen coordination between Parliament and Government. Institutional capacity is also growing: the Research Service and the planned Legislative Drafting Office and Budget Office reflect a transition toward a more professionalised, analytically capable legislature.

Wartime conditions temporarily weakened formal oversight mechanisms. Ministries attended committee meetings irregularly, Temporary Investigative Commissions operated with reduced publicity, and Question Time to the Government was suspended for nearly 20 months. The Cabinet operated for most of the war without an approved Programme of Activities, depriving Parliament of a core instrument of performance evaluation. Political centralisation further strengthened the executive: MPs initiated the vast majority of draft laws, often to bypass Cabinet procedures, and Parliament occasionally delegated normative authority to the Government — a constitutionally sensitive measure justified by wartime exigencies. Since late 2023, however, oversight has begun to recover. Question Time resumed; Temporary Investigative and Temporary Special Commissions (TICs/TSCs) became more active and transparent; and in 2025, the new Government submitted a Programme of Activities, restoring the legal basis for structured reporting. Nevertheless, accountability deficits persist, exemplified by ministers’ non-attendance at committee summons, the President’s veto of penalties for ignoring parliamentary invitations, and the absence of regular reporting by outgoing officials.

Overall, the Verkhovna Rada has demonstrated remarkable resilience under martial law, ensuring continuity of legislative activity, advancing EU-integration reforms, and gradually restoring transparency and oversight mechanisms. Yet structural challenges remain: uneven committee practices, procedural shortcuts in law-making, limited public consultation and lobbying transparency for MPs and the President, and the incomplete institutionalization of oversight. Wartime transparency can be assessed as satisfactory under the circumstances, but building a comprehensive post-war transparency architecture — including full enforcement of the committees’ transparency law, standardised EU-integration procedures, strengthened analytical capacity, and restoration of full parliamentary checks and balances — will be essential to modernising the Ukrainian legislature in line with democratic and European standards.

Research Paper: Ukrainian Parliament in Wartime: Key Tendencies and Challenges