06.04.2026
Energy Club hosted the final panel discussion dedicated to the reform of the National Commission for State Regulation of Energy and Public Utilities (NEURC). The event concluded a three-month cycle of expert discussions on legislative initiatives, specifically Draft Laws No. 14282 and No. 14282-1. Leading industry specialists, Members of Parliament, and legal experts debated how to ensure the Regulator’s institutional stability amidst wartime conditions and European integration requirements.
The discussion moderator, Energy Club Vice President Maksym Nemchynov, opened the meeting by noting that the Regulator currently fails to perform its function to the full extent. According to Maksym Nemchynov, there are instances where strategic decisions are made under external influence or revoked the day after being announced. He emphasized that the Regulator is not truly independent in its decision-making and proposed granting the Commission the right of legislative initiative within its powers, allowing it to independently propose measures for resource accounting and tariff policy.
Member of Parliament of Ukraine Viktoriia Hryb, as a co-author of the alternative draft law, underscored that the primary goal of the reform is to create a system where rules work, not specific individuals. Viktoriia Hryb noted that she and her colleagues aimed to eliminate any political pressure and make it impossible for the Cabinet of Ministers to overturn the Regulator’s decisions. At the same time, she emphasized the importance of accountability and proposed a mechanism for the Regulator to report annually to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, with a professional performance assessment by the relevant committee. She also opposed the simultaneous replacement of the entire Commission, supporting the idea of gradual rotation to preserve the body’s institutional memory.
President of MHP Eco Energy Oleksandr Dombrovskyi shared his experience in drafting the first law on the Regulator in 2016. He observed that during war and the destruction of the energy system, independence should be balanced and synchronized with the work of the Government and Parliament. Oleksandr Dombrovskyi emphasized that protecting consumer interests must be the key criterion for any regulation. He added that the Regulator of the future should focus on attracting investment and developing economic models for rapid infrastructure reconstruction following the cessation of hostilities.
Energy policy expert Svitlana Holikova recalled that every new president in Ukraine’s history has attempted to reshuffle the Regulator’s composition to suit their needs. In her view, the primary protection for Commission members lies not in the word “independence,” but in clear procedures and rules. Svitlana Holikova noted that regulation should only occur in sectors of natural monopolies, and the Regulator’s decisions must be transparent and well-founded. She also expressed doubt regarding the effectiveness of selection committees in their current form, suggesting that direct appointment of members by the Government—with full accountability for their performance—might be a more effective mechanism.
Attorney and Chairman of the UNAA Committee Oleksandr Trokhimets provided a legal perspective on NEURC’s status. He recalled that, according to the Constitutional Court’s ruling, the Regulator possesses all the characteristics of an executive branch body and must operate within that framework. Oleksandr Trokhimets emphasized that the priority in this discussion should be “markets” rather than the “regulator.” He believes the state should intervene in economic relations only when necessary for market functionality, rather than creating an “ephemeral independence.” He also pointed out the need for personal responsibility among Commission members and criticized the practice of avoiding official clarifications on their own acts.
Member of Parliament of Ukraine Oleksii Kucherenko called for a rigorous debate on industry management models. He stressed that the Regulator’s independence is primarily defined by the character of its personnel and their ability to say “no” to political pressure. Oleksii Kucherenko suggested that for the duration of the war, it might be advisable to adopt a special law on energy market management where responsibility is clearly assigned to specific institutions. He also highlighted the need for a monitoring body to analyze the justification of the Regulator’s decisions, as a significant portion of current resolutions, in his assessment, lacks proper argumentation.
Summarizing the discussion, participants agreed that the optimal way forward is the preparation of a refined draft law that integrates the best provisions from both the primary and alternative documents.
