By Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Editor (Canada-Ukraine), Times Asian
Vladyslav Hrytseniuk is a Ukrainian lawyer, advocate, educator, and lobbying professional based in Odesa with a PhD in Law. He is involved with the National Association of Lobbyists of Ukraine and promotes transparent, regulated lobbying. His work also includes legal education, professional standards, regional advocacy, and the development of Ukraine’s emerging lobbying framework and institutions.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Vladyslav Hrytseniuk discuss Ukraine’s European integration, legal reform, democratic aspirations, and Soviet legacies. They examine lobbying regulation, minority protections, wartime exhaustion, corruption, and displacement. Hrytseniuk advocates closer alignment with European standards while preserving Ukrainian identity and reflects on the uncertain return of Ukrainians who settled abroad.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: There are a few big issues in international public consciousness: EU integration, potential NATO membership, and the discussions around them. I said “potential.” I am aware of that distinction.
There is a lot of beautiful rhetoric from different world leaders, but let’s talk about concrete things. Regarding the future of Ukrainian law and its further alignment with EU law, could you have a European system with Ukrainian characteristics? I am borrowing from the phrase “socialism with Chinese characteristics.”
Which requirements are non-negotiable for Ukraine to join the EU? Which parts could retain Ukrainian characteristics?
Vladyslav Hrytseniuk: Very good question. A very big question. For example, the Law “On Lobbying” is one of the laws adopted as part of Ukraine’s EU accession commitments. And that is why Ukraine has to be there.
And about retaining Ukrainian characteristics, I agree 400%.
For us, this is a fundamental choice. If we do not take this chance to bring our system into line with European standards and move towards EU membership, I fear that disaster will return.
Look at Georgia and what has happened to its European path. You can see similar problems in other countries, to some extent. I think they have very interesting ways of thinking, but something from the past has come back to them.
We have this big chance. I have heard people say that this war is a disaster. I am Ukrainian. I know this, and I live here. But even during the war, there is a chance for us to rebuild something: to rebuild our legal system in line with European standards and develop a more European outlook.
I think we have suffered for it.
We have very big problems with this. I fear that Russia will pull us back towards its system. We could remain an independent country, but in terms of legal mentality. The mentality of many people. We could still be there. For me, it is a mission to prevent that.
Jacobsen: What were the strengths of the Soviet system? What are the strengths of the European system?
Hrytseniuk: Democracy describes the European system. Totalitarianism describes the Soviet system.
For me, the difference is also about the role of law itself. In the European legal tradition, the rule of law, human rights, and limits on state power are fundamental principles. The state should serve the individual, and the individual must have effective legal mechanisms to protect their rights, including against the state itself. This is one of the most important changes in legal thinking that Ukraine needs to continue developing. European integration should not mean losing our Ukrainian identity; it should mean strengthening our institutions and legal culture while preserving who we are.
I do not want totalitarianism in Ukraine. I want democracy in a positive sense. Democracy with a parliament, a president, and a parliamentary-presidential system. For me, that would be very good.
Jacobsen: I was told about discrimination under the Soviet legal system and how it was enforced. We can include this as a parenthetical or leave it out, but how did Soviet laws and practices discriminate against Jewish people and gay people? That is another benefit of the European framework: legal protections for individuals and minorities who are part of our societies.
There is a longer history of communities being pushed out, too. Was Operation Ezra and Nehemiah one of those cases, involving Iraq?
I am aware that Odesa had a significant Jewish population before the Soviet period. More broadly, minorities, including gay men, lesbian women, Jewish people, and Armenians, have faced discrimination in different societies, and still do.
The European model is not perfect. It is not from God, but it is a substantial improvement in protecting people who previously had little protection outside their own communities. Think of a gay man in the United States in the 1950s, or Jewish people in many parts of Europe in the early twentieth century.
In many contexts, women also bear the brunt of social inequalities.
Hrytseniuk: We have a proposed law concerning recognition of same-sex couples, including two women. Under our current law, marriage is between a man and a woman.
Jacobsen: We should always be careful when making comparisons. There is a wave of anti-Western sentiment, some based on history and some simply assigning blame.
The mistake is to treat dozens of countries as though they speak with one voice. That fundamentally misunderstands open societies. They disagree with one another all the time. Is their support for Ukraine unified, for instance? No. Is it consistent? No.
Talking about “the West” as one uniform entity can become stereotyping. You have to be more specific, right?
Hrytseniuk: Yes, specific. In Ukraine, people are exhausted. They are very tired of this war, of problems in our system, and of corruption.
Jacobsen: From conversations with my friends, my impression is that Putin and the Kremlin’s oligarchs are at the top of the list of people they resent. Sometimes that extends to Russians more broadly, but mostly it is directed at the Kremlin, followed by corrupt officials in Ukraine. That is my impression, rather than a measured ranking of public opinion.
Hrytseniuk: That is why, when we discuss European law and the European Union, we understand that they have many problems in their systems, too.
When the full-scale war started, my family lived in Prague for a year and a half. I know something about that system, including through my clients in the Czech Republic. I also know about banking in the European Union.
I think some of our systems are much better. But the main path is towards Europe. If we do not take it, or if the European Union closes the door to us, I think that would be very difficult for Ukraine and its citizens.
I am thinking especially of citizens who are in Ukraine now. Many Ukrainians have gone abroad. Perhaps they initially thought it would be for two or three weeks, and then everything would be fine.
But now, years have passed. Some have businesses, houses, flats, and families there. I think many will not come back. My concern is that most may not return.
They also know the legal systems there. For example, I know Ukrainian lawyers who have established law firms in Europe.
We pray.
Jacobsen: Thank you very much for the opportunity and your time, Vladyslav.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen is a Canadian journalist and publisher who serves as Times Asian’s Editor for Canada and Ukraine Affairs and writes on international affairs.
