Frontline Zone: Why Kyiv Needs a New Status and What It Will Mean

Recently, there has been increasing discussion in the public space about whether Kyiv should be granted government status as a territory with possible or active hostilities. In simpler terms, to recognize the city as frontline. On one side, regular mass drone and missile attacks, damage to housing and critical infrastructure create a reality that hardly differs from a frontline zone. On the other side, Kyiv remains the country’s main financial, administrative, and logistical center. So what exactly would a change in the city’s legal status mean for every Kyiv resident on a practical level—in transport, education, housing reconstruction, and business? The main worry of residents is a possible sharp tightening of movement restrictions. However, granting the city frontline status does not automatically imply a round-the-clock curfew. Yet changes in logistics will surely be felt. Video of the day First, changing Kyiv’s status would provide grounds for even stricter safety regulations for public transport, including the metro. The procedure for road traffic during air raids, as well as the operation of bridges over the Dnipro, could be reviewed. Second, there could be an increase in the number of mobile checkpoints within the city and at entry/exit points, expanded powers for the military to check documents and transport. Third, certain restrictions could affect night movement of freight transport, potentially reshaping delivery schedules of goods to supermarkets, etc. Apparently, changes will also affect education. Offline learning could become a thing of the past. For parents of schoolchildren and students, this is one of the most painful questions. Official recognition of the territory as frontline significantly strengthens the legal responsibility of leadership of educational institutions for child safety. In particular, a basic requirement for schools (including kindergartens) will be the availability of shelters that meet much stricter standards than now. Institutions that operated in a mixed format without proper protection will be forced to switch completely to distance learning. As for the social sphere, frontline territory status guarantees preservation and expansion of certain social benefits. In addition, under such conditions, allowances are provided to budget sector workers (medical workers, rescuers, utilities workers) who operate under increased risk. There are fears online about compensation for damaged housing and for work under city and state programs like “eRecovery.” Some say that if the city is frontline, payments will be delayed. In reality, this status change for the capital can have both a positive and a bureaucraticly challenging character. On one hand, recognizing the capital as frontline could open access for Kyivans to additional preferential programs and accelerated payout mechanisms under the eRecovery program, as well as attract international donor funds for rebuilding damaged homes. On the other hand, the procedure for recording damages could also undergo changes—assessment acts will be drawn up according to procedures provided for combat zones and require clear compliance with legal formalities (in some cases this speeds up access to funds). The legal status of a frontline city will inevitably affect the real estate market. It could provoke adjustments in rental prices and changes in property insurance terms (most insurers will refuse to insure properties against war risks or will significantly raise policy costs). Businesses should also know that the regulatory framework for frontline areas provides for the possibility of exemption or reduction of certain local taxes (notably property tax and land tax for property that has been damaged or located in a risk zone). Frontline status also simplifies the confirmation of force majeure circumstances with contractors and banks, which is important for many enterprises. But the main downside is that legally fixing frontline city status increases risk for international partners and investors who have internal restrictions on operating in combat zones. In short, globally, granting Kyiv frontline city status should not be seen as an apocalyptic scenario or a call to “pack a bag.” Yet it’s important to understand that new rules will emerge that will have to be adapted to. After all, with frontline status or without it, the capital has lived and continues to live in a state of full-scale war. Texts published in the “Opinions” section do not necessarily reflect the position of the editorial board of UNIAN. You can learn more about our editorial policy at the link.

at the link