16.01.2026
On January 14, 2026, Energy Club continued its series of expert discussions surrounding the reform of the national Regulator. Following discussions with the bill authors, the business community focused on legal analysis.
The meeting moderator, Energy Club Vice President Maksym Nemchynov, noted that the Regulator’s reform is one of the conditions of the Ukraine Facility program. However, the proposed mechanisms (Draft Laws No. 14282 and No. 14282-1) raise concerns within the legal community regarding their constitutionality and market consequences.
Leading industry lawyers participated in the discussion: Oleksii Hnatenko (Partner, Juscutum), Oleksandr Trokhymets (Head of the Energy Law Committee of the Ukrainian National Bar Association), Oleh Bakulin (gas sector expert), and Serhii Titenko (former NEURC Chairman).
Key Takeaways from the Discussion:
The idea of a full rotation (dismissal) of current NEURC members sparked the most debate.
Oleksandr Trokhymets called the idea of rotation via legislation “unconstitutional.” He emphasized:
“The Law on NEURC already defines exhaustive grounds for dismissal. If there is a violation — establish the fact and dismiss. But dismissal through the Final Provisions of a new law undermines trust in the state and international obligations.”
Oleksii Hnatenko characterized the approach of the main bill (No. 14282) as “reactive” and called it “hidden lustration without legal procedure.” In his opinion, the mandatory dismissal of all members would lead to a wave of lawsuits and chaos in the industry. He supported the approach of the alternative draft (No. 14282-1), which proposes dismissal only based on audit results.
Oleh Bakulin noted that there are no legal complaints regarding the work of the current Selection Commission, making the idea of rotation devoid of legal sense.
A provision in Bill No. 14282 regarding the Regulator’s liability received a positive assessment from the lawyers.
Oleksii Hnatenko called it revolutionary:
“It shifts the burden of proof from the business to the Regulator. If a business entity acted in accordance with the Regulator’s clarifications (or did not receive a response to an inquiry within the specified timeframe), its actions are considered lawful. This is analogous to the presumption of taxpayer lawfulness, which is very convenient for business.”
Participants questioned the very concept of the “absolute independence” of NEURC in Ukrainian realities.
Serhii Titenko remarked that the term “independence” is often manipulative.
“This is an executive body. If the government bears political responsibility for the state of affairs, perhaps the procedure should be simplified: the Cabinet or Parliament appoints commission members and bears full responsibility for them, instead of creating complex selection commissions that often serve as a screen,” the former NEURC Chairman noted.
Oleksandr Trokhymets reminded everyone of the 2019 Constitutional Court decision, which recognized that the Regulator must be subordinate to the Cabinet of Ministers. He also opposed granting NEURC members “special status,” insisting they are classic civil servants.
Oleh Bakulin expressed concern that the main bill aims to create “comfortable conditions” for the Regulator by removing external control (specifically by the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine) and replacing open face-to-face discussions with electronic consultations.
“Open discussions are the reform’s greatest achievement. When market participants can look each other in the eye and prove their position, balanced decisions are born,” the expert emphasized.
Conversely, the alternative draft (No. 14282-1) was praised for the provision requiring the mandatory personal participation of a NEURC member in open hearings.
Participants’ opinions were divided: from complete denial of the need for new laws to acknowledging specific positive provisions. However, the common denominator was the demand to adhere to the Constitution and avoid political reprisals disguised as reforms.
Energy Club will continue monitoring legislative initiatives and defending the market’s position in dialogue with the authorities. The next stage of discussion is the meeting with business on January 22.
