A Plenary Day That Brought Together Three Duties of the State
Some parliamentary days cannot be reduced to a list of votes. 14 May was one of them. The Verkhovna Rada worked with issues that, at first glance, belong to different spheres: international politics of remembrance, military ceremonial practice and the budgetary architecture of defence. In reality, all three directions speak to the same principle — the state’s ability to preserve its human dimension during a prolonged war.
The resolution on commemorating the victims of the genocide of the Crimean Tatar people returns Ukraine to the question of historical justice and the present-day occupation of Crimea. The law on a military farewell ceremony responds to the painful reality faced by many families whose loved ones have been declared dead but whose bodies have not been returned. The draft law on the military levy opens a wider debate on how to make defence financing more targeted, understandable and politically accountable.
These are three different decisions, but they are rooted in a common idea: a strong state is not defined by weapons alone. It must also be strong in memory, in law, in its ability to name crimes clearly, and in its capacity to explain honestly how wartime resources are directed.
The Crimean Tatar Question: Parliament Speaks the Language of Historical Justice
The Verkhovna Rada adopted Resolution No. 15227 — an appeal to governments and parliaments of foreign states, international organisations and parliamentary assemblies concerning the commemoration of the victims of the genocide of the Crimean Tatar people and the consolidation of international efforts to respond to human rights violations committed by the russian federation in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine.
The adoption of this appeal ahead of the Day of Remembrance of the Victims of the Genocide of the Crimean Tatar People carries significance far beyond symbolism. It places the deportation of 1944 in direct connection with the current russian occupation of Crimea, systemic persecution of Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars, politically motivated arrests, militarisation of the peninsula and the destruction of the legal order in the occupied territories.
The Ukrainian Parliament recognised the deportation of the Crimean Tatar people as an act of genocide in 2015 and established 18 May as a national day of remembrance. The 2026 decision develops that position in a new reality: russia’s aggression against Ukraine continues, Crimea remains occupied, and the issue of accountability for russian crimes is moving increasingly from a moral imperative to a concrete matter of international law.
This is why the Verkhovna Rada’s appeal goes beyond remembrance. It calls for continued support for the policy of non-recognition of russia’s attempted annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, for assistance in launching a Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine, and for further advancement of Ukraine’s European integration.
In effect, Parliament linked three levels of policy: the historical assessment of the deportation, the human rights assessment of today’s persecution in Crimea, and a diplomatic call for international action. This is an important signal not only to Ukraine’s partners abroad, but also to Ukrainian society: Crimea is not a postponed issue. It remains central to the national agenda and to the future architecture of justice.
Military Farewell Ceremony: The State Recognises Families’ Right to Dignity
The second major decision of the plenary day was Law No. 15029 concerning the military farewell ceremony. Parliament formalised the procedure for paying military honours to persons who defended Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity and who have been declared dead by a court.
Before this decision, there was a painful legal and human gap. Where the body of a fallen defender had not been returned, it was impossible to conduct a full military funeral ritual in the traditional sense. At the same time, the family, the community and the state all required a recognised, dignified and public form of farewell. The law responds precisely to this gap between legal procedure and human grief.
To address this issue, the law introduces the concept of a military farewell ceremony — a solemn act of military honours held at the site of a cenotaph. In this context, a cenotaph is a symbolic memorial structure preserving the memory of a defender where the body or remains are absent.
In the context of russia’s war against Ukraine, this decision has meaning far beyond ceremonial practice. It acknowledges that missing and fallen defenders whose bodies have not been returned cannot remain in a grey zone of state remembrance. Their families have a right to official honouring. Communities have a right to public memorial space. The state has a duty to fulfil its moral obligation to those who defended it.
This decision is especially important at a time when Ukraine continues to return prisoners of war, identify the fallen, record those missing in action and build its own national culture of remembrance. The war has forced the state to rethink not only its defence system, but also its memorial policy. Law No. 15029 is part of that rethinking.
The Military Levy and the Special Budget Fund: Defence Money as a Matter of Political Accountability
The third significant decision of the day was the adoption in the first reading of Draft Law No. 15167 amending Section VI of the Budget Code of Ukraine regarding the allocation of the military levy to the special fund of the State Budget.
The proposed model provides that from 1 January 2027 until 31 December of the third calendar year following the termination or cancellation of martial law, the military levy will be fully transferred to the special fund of the State Budget and directed to the monetary support of servicemembers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
In this case, the term “special fund” matters not only to budget specialists. It signifies an attempt to create a political and financial link between one of the most sensitive wartime payments and a clearly defined purpose — supporting those who bear the direct burden of defending the country.
For society, this is a matter of transparency. For servicemembers, it is a matter of prioritisation. For Parliament, it is a matter of responsibility, as the draft law will now be revised by the Budget Committee with due consideration of amendments and proposals submitted by legislative actors before its second reading.
At the same time, the very fact that such an approach received parliamentary support indicates that financing the army can no longer remain a purely technical budgetary procedure. It is becoming an issue of trust between the state, taxpayers and servicemembers.
What These Decisions Mean for Communities and Regions
The decisions adopted by the Verkhovna Rada on 14 May are national in scope, yet their real impact will also be felt at the local level. Cenotaphs are installed in communities. Memorial ceremonies take place in cities and villages. Families of servicemembers live and seek support locally. Regional authorities help shape practices of veteran assistance, remembrance and public trust. It is within communities that justice, memory and financial confidence take on their most concrete human meaning.
In this sense, the plenary day of 14 May matters not only because of the adopted documents. It demonstrates that during wartime Parliament must uphold several frameworks of responsibility at once: external responsibility before international partners, internal responsibility before citizens, and moral responsibility before those who gave their lives for Ukraine.
A Plenary Sitting as a Reflection of the Country’s Priorities
In political life, every date is quickly replaced by the next news cycle. Yet not every plenary sitting carries the same weight. On 14 May, the Verkhovna Rada adopted decisions that do more than regulate separate procedures. They define the tone of the state in three fundamental matters.
First, Ukraine refuses to allow crimes against the Crimean Tatar people to fade into oblivion and does not separate historical memory from the contemporary struggle for the de-occupation of Crimea.
Second, Ukraine recognises that a defender’s dignity does not end on the battlefield. It continues in the state’s attitude towards the family, the right to honouring and the culture of national remembrance.
Third, Ukraine is searching for a clearer and more targeted model of defence financing, one in which public solidarity does not dissolve into budgetary abstraction.
This is why the plenary day of 14 May should be read not as a technical set of votes, but as a broader political statement. It shows what kind of state Ukraine is striving to be during the war: a state that remembers, a state that honours, and a state capable of explaining its priorities.
