GOVERNMENT-OPPOSITION RELATIONS IN UKRAINE UNDER MARTIAL LAW

Abstract

This article examines the characteristics of government-opposition relations in Ukraine under conditions of martial law. Based on the analyzed data, it is shown that the preservation of democratic procedures during wartime depends on a combination of legal continuity, parliamentary institutional capacity, and the presence of channels for public oversight. Special attention is given to the transformation of parliamentary practice toward a shift from a confrontational to a cooperative model of oppositional behaviour, based on support for key defence decisions while engaging in constructive criticism within procedural standards.The study analyzes the impact of martial law on the reduction of political competition, the adaptation of political parties to new functional tasks, and the limitations imposed on opposition instruments. At the same time, it is demonstrated that parliamentary oversight, committee work, mechanisms for submitting amendments, and opposition participation in supervisory structures remain key channels for minority influence on decision- making. The article emphasizes that the legitimacy of state authority is maintained not through restricting the opposition, but by ensuring procedural transparency, rhythmic oversight, and a legal order that serves as a «security framework».It is further suggested that the post-war phase will require a profound restructuring of the party landscape, strengthening managerial competence, and a gradual return to a fully functional electoral process based on inclusiveness, security, open competition, and democratic accountability. In conclusion, the author asserts that under conditions of war, democratic accountability and the efficiency of governance can coexist effectively, provided that procedural balance is maintained and the opposition is involved in the formulation of key decisions.