ACTIVITIES OF THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE AND THE NATIONAL SECURITY AND DEFENSE COUNCIL OF UKRAINE UNDER MARTIAL LAW

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the activities of the President of Ukraine and the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine (NSDC) under the legal regime of martial law, introduced in response to the armed aggression of the Russian Federation. The constitutional and legal status of the President of Ukraine as the guarantor of state sovereignty and territorial integrity and the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is revealed, and the place of the NSDC as a coordinating body in the system of ensuring national security and defense is also determined. It is shown that martial law significantly transforms the practice of functioning of state authorities: the need for efficiency and centralization of management decisions increases, the coordinating role of the head of state in the security and defense sector is strengthened, and the NSDC actually becomes a key platform for interagency interaction, preparation of strategic decisions and control over their implementation through the mechanism of putting decisions into effect by presidential decrees. Special attention is paid to the issue of legitimacy and limits of the use of extraordinary powers in wartime: it is emphasized that the expansion of the practical role of the presidential vertical can ensure the effectiveness of crisis management and the mobilization of resources, but at the same time it creates risks of excessive personalization of power and complications of returning to normal democratic procedures after the end of the war. The legal aspects of temporary restrictions on certain rights and freedoms, the suspension of electoral processes and the application of sanctions as instruments of response to threats to national security are considered, the need for their compliance with the principles of necessity and proportionality and the provision of appropriate guarantees of control is emphasized. The need for further improvement of the regulatory and legal regulation of martial law, a clear delimitation of competences between civil authorities and military command, strengthening parliamentary and judicial control over security decisions, as well as institutional strengthening of coordination mechanisms to maintain the balance between defense effectiveness and the rule of law in war and post-war periods is substantiated.