“The Civil Code is a step backward; we won’t allow a setback,” participants chanted during a peaceful protest in Lviv on March 8. More than 100 people gathered in the square in front of the Lviv Opera House to urge members of parliament to review the new Civil Code draft. According to them, the document poses a risk of discrimination and could lead to a rollback of human rights.
Fighting Institutional Violence and Sexism
“Together, we must overcome institutional barriers that violate women’s rights. We must demand protection for girls and women in higher education institutions, where they still face sexual harassment and sexism. We must demand appropriate punishment for abusers and rapists, regardless of their position or how well they are protected by patriarchy.
As long as such initiatives are emerging within the highest legislative bodies, we must speak out and declare that we will not remain silent and will not tolerate violence against women and girls,” said Iryna Trokhym, deputy head of the Non-Governmental Centre “Women’s Perspectives”.
The Danger Behind “Good Morals”
“Accountability for violence, not vague good morals” was among the slogans of the protest. “Good morals” (an apparent attempt to recreate the Latin concept of boni mores) is a novel legal concept in the Ukrainian context, which the authors of the draft bill are seeking to introduce. Here, it refers to a set of moral norms and principles established in society. However, it lacks a precise legal definition, making its interpretation inherently subjective. This ambiguity enables its use to justify domestic violence and discrimination by framing them as accepted societal practices.
“We do not want someone’s moral principles and traditions to be used to legitimize violence against women, so we demand that the review of the draft be stopped and that a public discussion be initiated,” said Olha Yashchenko, head of the NGO Feminist Workshop.
Risk of Discrimination and Legal Uncertainty
The new Code is discriminatory in a lot of aspects. It avoids established terminology on sexual orientation and gender identity, instead hiding behind the vague “right to individuality.” At the same time, this right to individuality may be restricted if it conflicts with “good morals.”
“The principle of legal certainty requires clarity and unambiguity in terminology, as it is this certainty that protects against arbitrariness and guarantees protection for citizens. We need real protection mechanisms and clearly defined terms in legislation, not vague notions of moral norms,” emphasized Olha Yashchenko.
The Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Risk of “Soviet” Practices
Moreover, the draft bill largely overlooks the rights of persons with disabilities. While it does not introduce new discriminatory provisions, it retains outdated ones that are inconsistent with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. In effect, a psychiatric diagnosis could lead to a person losing the ability to make independent decisions. This approach creates a high risk of abuse by legal guardians.
“Stefanchuk’s Civil Code = return to the Soviet era” was one of the protest slogans. It highlights the risk of a return to outdated practices, where the state restricts human rights instead of guaranteeing and supporting them.
Restrictions on the Right to Divorce and Reproductive Pressure
The draft also proposes reinstating the ban on divorce during pregnancy and during the baby’s first year of life. In other words, people who do not wish to live together could be legally forced to do so. Another restriction concerns the minimum marriage age. The draft code proposed lowering the marriage age to fourteen in cases of pregnancy. Only increased public attention and hundreds of complaints from activists and human rights defenders forced lawmakers to back down from this decision.
“Today, they ban divorce during pregnancy, and tomorrow they’ll say you need your husband’s permission to divorce and ban abortion. First, they introduce ‘good morals,’ and then they will dictate to us what we should look like and what we should wear. Doesn’t this remind us of anything?” asked Liubov Pankevych, community manager at the NGO Feminist Workshop. “They want to push this new code through quietly and strip us of our rights just as quietly. But we will make our voices heard. And if they don’t like it, they’ll try to intimidate us. But we are women — we overcome fear every day. And we will stop this rollback of our rights.”
In addition, the document proposes that a marriage be deemed invalid if one of the spouses undergoes a gender transition.
“This is a document that can become the framework of our entire lives. It’s not just a warning sign; it is a wake-up call for women, LGBTIQ people, people with disabilities, and therefore for all other vulnerable categories of the population. As the experience of neighboring countries shows, countries that agreed to a selective narrowing of rights received a systematic dismantling of guarantees,” summed up Olha Yashchenko, human rights activist and head of the NGO Feminist Workshop.
Culture of Violence as a Systemic Problem
The participants emphasized that the Civil Code is a symptom of a deeper systemic issue. They were referring to a culture of violence that remains deeply entrenched in society. Activist Daria Selishcheva believes it is important to continue resisting it:
“I’m talking about the culture of violence we’re fighting against — a culture where the truth belongs to whoever shouts the loudest, strikes the hardest, holds the most power, and has the least reason to stop and think. A culture that makes no room for women, for the LGBT community, or for weaker men.
No one speaks openly about this culture, yet states, institutions, and families are built upon it. The consequences of this culture still need to be overcome by activists, psychologists, and women who care about others’ tears and understand violence all too well because they’ve been through it themselves, even though this is everyone’s responsibility.
Another manifestation of this culture is the draft Civil Code, where perpetrators are granted even more power.”
The activists’ demands and the protest’s safety
The organizers are calling for the draft to be revised in consultation with human rights groups. After all, this concerns people’s fundamental rights and safety, and it applies to everyone without exception.
“Why do we still have to scream about basic things — the right to safety and dignity, the right to take decisions about our bodies, the right to decide independently whether to marry or divorce, the right to justice for violence committed against us, and recognition of this violence as such?
We are people holding cardboard posters, and we have the right to be ourselves, fight for our rights, and not let anyone take them from us,” said Liubov Pankevych, community manager at the NGO Feminist Workshop.
Despite the issue’s social importance, the organizers had to change the event’s format in Lviv. Because of the threats they had received, it was rescheduled, and the number of participants was reduced for safety reasons. However, this did not stop the protest.
The participants emphasize that even under difficult conditions, they continue to take to the streets and speak out about human rights, violence, and discrimination.
“Every day, we all overcome our fears to live in a free and independent Ukraine, free of sexism. I became an activist as a teenager (at 15), and now I’m a grown woman who still has to protest the same issues,” said Sofi, an activist, emphasizing that change cannot be delayed.
“The day will come when we won’t need protection because we won’t be attacked simply for existing. And that day will come thanks to you and other women, brave and unbreakable, even when it’s hard. Thanks to you, who speak up, even when it’s frightening. Thanks to you, who stand shoulder to shoulder and will keep standing for as long as it takes. Thank you for coming. Together, we are power!” Olha Yashchenko addressed the participants at the end of the event.
Text and translation by: Alona Timkova
