2004
Volume 13, Issue 2/3
  • ISSN: 2212-4810
  • E-ISSN: 2212-6465

Samenvatting

Abstract

The paper deals with the implications of treating law as an instrument and religion as a question of state security, from both a majority as well as a minority faith group perspective. Labelled as a “policy of counteraction”, the recent legislative initiatives undertaken by the Ukrainian state, currently at war with Russia, (particularly those affecting the branch of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church connected to Russia) affect the exercise of freedom of religion or belief. They shift the debate on law-making in connection to fundamental rights protection and the role of the state in socio-legal terms in several ways. Using the theoretical frameworks of legal instrumentalism and lawfare, the paper discusses, first, the use(s) of law within the current war between Russia and Ukraine; second, how recent legislative action related to religious freedoms in Ukraine can be interpreted as part of religious lawfare; third, the implications of religious lawfare for religious diversity management in Ukraine.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/JLRS2025.2.3.007.TOPI
2025-12-01
2026-04-26

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/22126465/13/2/3/JLRS2025.2.3.007.TOPI.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/JLRS2025.2.3.007.TOPI&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Amsterdam & Partners. “Open Letter in Response to the Law and Liberty Trust on the Freedom of Religion in Ukraine”. March5, 2024. Accessed July31, 2025. https://amsterdamandpartners.com/open-letter-in-response-to-the-law-and-liberty-trust-on-freedom-of-religion-in-ukraine.
  2. Arjona, A., Kasfir, N., and Mampilly, Z.“Introduction”. In Rebel Governance in Civil War, edited by A.Arjona, N.Kasfir, and Z.Mampilly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachmann, S.-D. D., and Mosquera, A. B. M.“Hybrid Warfare as Lawfare: Towards a Comprehensive Legal Approach”. In A Civil-Military Response to Hybrid Threats, edited by E.Cusumano and M.Corbe. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60798-6_4.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bachmann, S.-D. D., and Mosquera, A. B. M.“Lawfare as Hybrid Warfare—How Russia is Using the Law as a Weapon”. Amicus Curiae120 (2015), 25–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bachmann, S.-D. D., D.Putter, and G.Duczynski. “Hybrid Warfare and Disinformation: A Ukraine War Perspective”. Global Policy14, (2023): 858–869. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13257.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Beck‚ A.“China’s Strategy in the Arctic: A case of lawfare?” 4(2)The Polar Journal4, no.2 (2014): 306–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2014.954886.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Brytsyn, M., and Vasin, M.Faith under Russian Terror: Analysis of the Religious Situation in Ukraine. Franklin, TN: Mission Eurasia, 2025. Accessed July31, 2025. https://missioneurasia.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2025-Mission-Eurasia-report-on-Ukraine-ENG.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cecco, L.“What Is Hybrid Warfare, Which Some Fear Russia Will Use after Ukraine’s Strike?”The Guardian, November20, 2024. Accessed July31, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/19/hybrid-warfare-russia-ukraine.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark, E.“Civil Religion and Religious Freedom in the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict”. In Religion during the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict, edited by E.Clark and D.Vovk. London: Routledge, 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cotterrell, R.“Is Law Just a Means to an End?”Socio-Legal Review4, no. 1 (2008): 1–8.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dawisha, K., and Parrott, B.Russia and the New States of Eurasia: The Politics of Upheaval. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Department for External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church. “The Basis of the Social Concept: VIII War and Peace”. Accessed July31, 2025. https://www.mospatusa.com/files/THE-BASIS-OF-THE-SOCIAL-CONCEPT.pdf.
  13. Dunlap, C. J.“A Virtuous Warrior in a Savage World”. United States Air Force Academy Journal of Legal Studies8 (1998): 71–108.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dunlap, C. J.“Does Lawfare Need an Apologia?”Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law43 (2010), 121–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Dunlap, C. J.“Law and Military Interventions: Preserving Humanitarian Values in 21st Century Conflicts”. Prepared for the Humanitarian Challenges in Military Intervention Conference, Washington, D. C., November29, 2001. Accessed July31, 2025, https://people.duke.edu/~pfeaver/dunlap.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Dunlap, C. J.“Lawfare Today: A Perspective”. Yale Journal of International Affairs3 (2008): 146–154.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Gerasimov, V.“The Value of Science is in the Foresight: New Challenges Demand Rethinking the Forms and Methods of Carrying out Combat Operations”. Military Review (January-February2016): 23–29. Accessed July31, 2025. https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/military-review/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20160228_art008.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Griffin, S.“Russian World or Holy World War?”Public Orthodoxy. April12, 2022. Accessed July31, 2025, https://publicorthodoxy.org/2022/04/12/russian-world-or-holy-world-war/.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hirschl, R.“The Judicialization of Politics”. In The Oxford Handbook of Political Science, edited by R.Goodin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199604456.013.0013.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hirschl, R.Towards Juristocracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hoffman, F. G.Conflict in the 21st Century: The Rise of Hybrid Wars. Arlington, VA: Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, 2007. Accessed July31, 2025. https://www.potomacinstitute.org/images/stories/publications/potomac_hybridwar_0108.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Holmes, O. W.“The Path of the Law”. Harvard Law Review10 (1897), 457–478.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Houston, A., and Mandaville, P.“The Role of Religion in Russia’s War on Ukraine”. United States Institute of Peace. March17, 2022. Accessed July31, 2025. https://www.usip.org/publications/2022/03/role-religion-russias-war-ukraine.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Jakobs, G.“Kriminalisierung im Vorfeld einer Rechtsgutsverletzung” [Criminalization in the Run-up to a Violation of a Legally Protected Interest]. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft97, no. 4 (1985): 751–785. https://doi.org/10.1515/zstw.1985.97.4.751.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kennedy, D.Of War and Law. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Kennedy, D.“Speech: Modern War and Modern Law”. University of Baltimore Law Review36, no. 2 (2007): 173–194.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Kharkovshchenko, Y., Kostiuk, O., Piletsky, E., Zubchyk, O., and Turenko, V.“The Religious Landscape amidst Warfare in Ukraine: Assessing the Situation”. Multidisciplinary Science Journal6 (2024): e2024ss0728. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2024ss0728.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kilp, A.“The Role of the ROC in the Sacralization of Secular Imperial Nationalism”. Talk About: Law and Religion. February24, 2023. Accessed July31, 2025. https://talkabout.iclrs.org/2023/02/24/sacralization-of-secular-imperial-nationalism/.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Kittrie, O. F.Law as a Weapon of War. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Lanoszka, A.“Russian Hybrid Warfare and Extended Deterrence in Eastern Europe”. International Affairs92, no. 1 (2016): 175–195, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12509, available at https://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/15362/7/Lanoszka%20-%20Early%20Version%20of%20Russian%20Hybrid%20Warfare%20and%20Extended%20Deterrence%20in%20Eastern%20Europe.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Lasconjarias, G., and Larsen, J. A.NATO’s Response to Hybrid Threats. Rome: NATO Defense College, 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Lazarev, E.State-Building as Lawfare: Custom, Sharia and State Law in Postwar Chechnya. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009245913.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Libiseller, C.“Hybrid Warfare as an Academic Fashion”. Journal of Strategic Studies46, no. 6 (2023): 858–880. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2023.2177987.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Llewellyn, K.“A Realistic Jurisprudence—The Next Step”. Columbia Law Review, 30 no. 4 (1930): 431–465.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Luchenko, K.“How the Ukrainian Orthodox Church Became a Weapon for Moscow and Washington”. Carnegie Politika. March21, 2025. Accessed July31, 2025. https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2025/03/ukraine-church-dilemma?lang=en.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Magda, Y.Russia’s Hybrid Aggression: Lessons for the World. Kyiv: Kalamar, 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Marahrens, S., and Schröfl, J.“The Russia-Ukraine Conflict from a Hybrid Warfare Cognitive Perspective”. The Defence Horizon Journal, April25, 2024. Accessed July31, 2025. https://tdhj.org/blog/post/russia-ukraine-hybrid-cognitive-warfare/.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Martí, J. L.“Lawfare and Democracy. Law as a Weapon of War”. IDEES, November2, 2020. Accessed July31, 2025. https://revistaidees.cat/en/lawfare-and-democracy-law-as-a-weapon-of-war/.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. McKeown, R.“Legal Asymmetries in Asymmetric War”. Review of International Studies41, no. 1 (2015): 117–138. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210514000096.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Negron, Z.“To Whom Much is Given: The Russian Orthodox Church’s Role in the Russo-Ukrainian War”. Journal of Church and State67, no. 1 (2025): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/csae046.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Nonet, P., and Selznick, P.Law and Society in Transition: Toward Responsive Law. New York: Harper and Row, 1978.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Paphiti, A., and S.-D. D.Bachmann. “Written Evidence Submitted by Brigadier (Rtd) Anthony Paphiti, Former ALS Officer and Dr Sascha Dov Bachmann, Associate Professor in International Law”. UK Parliament. February5, 2026. Accessed July31, 2025. https://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/defence-committee/russia-implications-for-uk-defence-and-security/written/28402.html.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Alexei Navalny’s Death and the Need to Counter Vladimir Putin’s Totalitarian Regime and Its War on Democracy (Doc. 15966). Adopted April17, 2024. Accessed July31, 2025. https://pace.coe.int/en/files/33511/html.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Pound, R.“The Need of a Sociological Jurisprudence”. Green Bag19 (1907): 607–615.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Putin, V.“Address by the President of the Russian Federation”. President of Russia. February21, 2022. Accessed July31, 2025. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67828.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Qureshi, W. A.“The Rise of Hybrid Warfare”. Notre Dame Journal of International and Comparative Law10, no. 2 (2020): 173–205.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Razumkov Center. Peculiarities of religious and church-religious self-determination of citizens of Ukraine: Trends 2000-2021. Kyiv: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, 2021. Accessed July31, 2025. https://razumkov.org.ua/uploads/article/2021_Religiya.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Razumkov Center. Ukrainske sustpilstvo, derzhava i tserkva pid chas viyny. Tsekkovno-religiyna sytuatsiya v Ukraini [Ukrianian Society, State and Church during the War. Ecclesiastical-Religious Situation in Ukraine]. Kyiv: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, 2023. Accessed July31, 2025. https://razumkov.org.ua/images/2023/12/19/2023-Religiya-F.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Rivkin, D. B. and Casey, L. A.“Opinion: Lawfare”. Wall Street Journal, February23, 2007. Accessed July31, 2025, https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB117220137149816987?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAhpK5cGZggW1EAGzNQMK50KzMkhi5Vk_EiuSTZCfIAGU1dHsODtGrqy_-3H33A%3D&gaa_ts=68a676aa&gaa_sig=OfE7Us3NPhXEj4QAs__ue07Yz8WmBWKyEnRgCDKnXROUPjrLotnd7QHTNuGKcDZGpByzN0cTYmSGGvSFm399TQ%3D%3D.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Rondeaux, C.“The Legal Counteroffensive to Russia’s Hybrid War”. Lawfare. April6, 2025. Accessed July31, 2025. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-legal-counteroffensive-to-russia-s-hybrid-war.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Russian Orthodox Church. “The Basis of the Social Concept”. Accessed July31, 2025. https://old.mospat.ru/en/documents/social-concepts/.
  52. Skladanowski, M., and Smuniewski, C.“The Secularism of Putin’s Russia and Patriarch Kirill’s Church: The Russian Model of State–Church Relations and Its Social Reception”. Religions14, no. 1 (2023): 119–131. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14010119.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Smith, S. D.“The Academy, the Court and the Culture of Rationalism,” in That Eminent Tribunal: Judicial Supremacy and the Constitution, edited by C.Wolfe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Stephens, D.“The Age of Lawfare”. International Law Studies87 (2011): 327–357.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Synchak, B., Yelisovenko, Y., and Romanchuk, S.“Information War in the Religious Sphere in the Context of the ‘Battle’ for Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra”. Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe43, no. 7 (2023): 68–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Szyszlak, T.“The Conflict over the Autocephaly of Ukrainian Orthodoxy as an Element of the Hybrid War”. Rocznik Instiytutu Europy Srodkowo-Wschodniej18, no. 3 (2020): 49–71, https://doi.org/10.36874/RIESW.2020.3.3.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Tamanaha, Brian Z.“How an Instrumental View of Law Corrodes the Rule of Law”. DePaul Law Review56 (2007): 469–506.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Tamanaha, Brian Z.“The Tension between Legal Instrumentalism and the Rule of Law”. Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce33, no. 1 (2005): 131–154.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Topidi, K.“Ethno-Cultural Minority Identities at War in Ukraine and Beyond”. In Ukraine’s Minorities at War: Cultural Identity and Resilience, edited by E.Muratova and N.Zasanska. London: Routledge, 2024.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Trachtman, J. P.“Integrating Lawfare and Warfare”. Boston College International and Comparative Law Review39, no. 2 (2016): 267–282, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2948981.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Tropin, Z.“Lawfare as Part of Hybrid Wars: The Experience of Ukraine in Conflict with Russian Federation”. Security and Defence Quarterly33, no. 1 (2021): 15–29. https://doi.org/10.35467/sdq/132025.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Ukrainian Catholic University (UCU). “Prohibition or Defence: New Legislation on the Activities of Religious Organisations in Ukraine in the Context of Russian Aggression”. October16, 2024. Accessed July31, 2025, https://ucu.edu.ua/en/news/zaborona-chy-oborona-nove-zakonodavstvo-pro-diyalnist-religijnyh-organizatsij-v-ukrayini-v-umovah-rosijskoyi-agresiyi/.
  63. Vasin, M.“New Religious Legislation in Ukraine as a Response to Russian Aggression”. In Security, Religion and the Rule of Law: International Perspectives, edited by T.Pagotto, J. M.Roose, and G. P.Marcar. London: Routledge, 2024. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003453086-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Vorobiov, M.“Ukraine Bans Russia’s Orthodox Church”. CEPA. August20, 2024. Accessed July31, 2025. https://cepa.org/article/ukraine-bans-russias-orthodox-church.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Vovk, D.“Between National Security and Spiritual Liberation: Ukrainian State Policies towards the Ukrainian Orthodox Church”. Canadian Slavonic Papers67, no. 1–2 (2025): 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00085006.2025.2494937.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Vovk, D.“Dynamics of Church-State Relations in Ukraine and the Military Conflict with Russia”. In Religion During the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict, edited by E.Clark and D.Vovk. London: Routledge, 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Vovk, D.“Ukraine: Real Threats but Freedom of Religion or Belief Concerns”. Forum 18, August21, 2024. Accessed July31, 2025. https://www.forum18.org/archive.php?article_id=2929.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Voyger, M.“Russian Lawfare—Russia’s Weaponisation of International and Domestic Law: Implications for the Region and Policy Recommendations”. Journal on Baltic Security4, no. 2 (2018), 35–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Woodward, C.“The Limits of Legal Realism: An Historical Perspective”. Virginia Law Review54, no. 4 (1968): 689–739.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Zvobgo, K.“Ukraine and the Promise and Peril of Lawfare”. Brookings Commentary. March13, 2025. Accessed July31, 2025. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/ukraine-and-the-promise-and-peril-of-lawfare/.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Law of Ukraine No. 2662-VIII on Amending Article 12 of the Law of Ukraine “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations” Regarding the Names of Religious Organizations (Associations) That Are Part of the Structure (Are Part of) a Religious Organization (Association), the Management Center (Administration) of Which Is Located outside Ukraine in a State That Is Recognized by Law as Having Committed Military Aggression against Ukraine and/or Temporarily Occupied Part of the Territory of Ukraine. VVR No. 3 (2019): 23. Accessed July31, 2025, https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2662-19.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Law of Ukraine No. 2673-VIII on Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Regarding the Subordination of Religious Organizations and the Procedure for State Registration of Religious Organizations with the Status of a Legal Entity. VVR No. 6 (2019): 40. Accessed July31, 2025, https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2673-19.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Law of Ukraine No 3894-IX on the Protection of the Constitutional Order in the Sphere of Activities of Religious Organizations. VRR No. 49 (2024): 290. Accessed July31, 2025, https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3894-20#Text.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/JLRS2025.2.3.007.TOPI
Loading
  • Soort artikel: Research Article
Keyword(s): hybrid war; lawfare; legal instrumentalism; religion; Ukraine
Dit is een verplicht veld
Graag een geldig e-mailadres invoeren
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error