The Verkhovna Rada voted with 288 deputies in favor to send a bill on constitutional amendments (decentralization, including provisions for Donbas) to the Constitutional Court for evaluation.
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The Verkhovna Rada has repeatedly treated constitutional amendments on decentralization as a high priority: President Zelensky submitted a bill on decentralization to parliament on December 13 [1], and Ukrainian authorities have framed constitutional change as necessary to complete the 2014 decentralization reform and align local governance with EU norms [2]. Multiple official and expert sources show ongoing legislative work and debate on decentralization across 2022–2025, but available sources do not mention a specific vote result of “288 deputies in favor” sending a bill to the Constitutional Court in the precise terms you stated.
1. A presidential bill, a long-running reform effort
The initiative to amend the Constitution on decentralization is an ongoing executive and parliamentary project: the President formally submitted a draft on December 13, according to the decentralization ministry’s notice [1]. That filing is part of a reform trajectory that began after 2014 — policymakers and analysts treat constitutional change as the next step to lock in administrative and financial decentralization measures [2].
2. Why constitutional amendments matter now
Analysts and reform advocates say updating the Constitution would embed reforms (prefecture-style oversight, clarified powers and fiscal rules) so decentralization survives political cycles; the White Book of Reforms frames constitutional change as the culmination of the reform started in 2014 and as necessary to adopt EU-style supervision of local government [2]. Parliamentary leaders and committees have repeatedly signalled urgency in finishing the legislative package to give communities stable legal architecture [3] [4].
3. Parliamentary process and expert scrutiny
The Rada’s work has included committee dialogues, working groups and expert input: the First Deputy Chairman and committee members have discussed finalizing draft amendments and timing for producing the final text [4]. Independent legal analysis produced as early as 2020 flagged problematic and debatable norms in draft constitutional amendments, warning of clauses that could strengthen central control or raise legal conflicts requiring Constitutional Court review [5].
4. Where the Constitutional Court fits in
Sending a constitutional amendment bill to the Constitutional Court for evaluation is a standard procedural step in Ukrainian practice when questions of conformity or complex legal drafting arise; expert commentary and legal scholarship point to the Court’s role in vetting constitutional changes and in resolving tensions between decentralization provisions and existing constitutional norms [5]. Sources show the executive and parliamentary branches anticipate judicial review as part of the process [4] [5].
5. The claim about “288 deputies” — what sources say and don’t say
Your specific claim that “the Verkhovna Rada voted with 288 deputies in favor to send a bill on constitutional amendments (decentralization, including provisions for Donbas) to the Constitutional Court” is not corroborated in the supplied material. The decentralization ministry confirms the bill’s submission on December 13 [1], and other sources document parliamentary work and public discussion [3] [4], but none of the provided search results records a roll‑call figure of 288 deputies or links the vote explicitly to provisions on Donbas (available sources do not mention the 288‑vote figure or an explicit vote about Donbas provisions).
6. The Donbas angle — present in reporting or not?
Provided sources discuss decentralization broadly and do not single out Donbas provisions in the December filings or parliamentary summaries you supplied (available sources do not mention specific Donbas clauses in the December 13 draft) [1] [3] [2]. Historical debates over decentralization have sometimes touched on the special status or governance arrangements for conflict-affected territories, but that detail is not present in the current set of results (p1_s11 mentions contentious norms generally but does not document a specific Donbas clause in these documents).
7. Competing perspectives and implicit agendas
Official materials (presidential and ministry notices) present decentralization as necessary and inevitable to strengthen communities [1] [2]. Independent legal scholarship cautions that poorly drafted amendments risk expanding central power or generating conflicts requiring remedial action [5]. International partners and reform projects (e.g., USAID‑linked initiatives cited by Uacrisis) push for continued legislative refinement and capacity building, indicating a reform agenda shaped by both domestic political calculus and external technical assistance [3].
8. What to watch next
Follow official Verkhovna Rada bulletins and committee minutes for any roll‑call vote records and formal transmissions to the Constitutional Court (p1_s10 contains parliamentary updates), monitor Constitutional Court statements for docketing of any referral, and look for legal institute or expert commentary for analysis of specific clauses once the Court opinion or detailed bill text is published [5] [4].
Limitations: this analysis relies solely on the supplied sources; they confirm the December 13 bill submission and ongoing parliamentary work [1] [4] [3] [2] but do not confirm the specific vote tally or explicit Donbas provisions you cited (available sources do not mention those precise claims).