Registration of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine at the Center of a Dispute over Religious Freedom

Dispute over the Registration of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine

The registration process of the religious structure known as the “Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine” continues to generate debate over the application of Ukrainian legislation in the field of religious freedom and the organization of religious communities. According to Ukrainian legal expert Olga Kolesnychenko, the authorities in Kyiv should not indefinitely prolong the procedure through political and church consultations without identifying a specific legal obstacle.

Kolesnychenko, a former deputy head of the Izmail District State Administration, says she was directly involved in previous years in handling documents concerning Romanian Orthodox communities in Odesa region. In an analysis published on social media, she examines the current situation from the perspective of Ukrainian legislation, the principle of state neutrality toward religious organizations, and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

A Process That, According to the Legal Expert, Has Been Ongoing for Several Years

According to Olga Kolesnychenko’s account, the issue of the legal recognition of the affiliation of Romanian Orthodox communities with the Romanian Patriarchate did not begin in 2024, but several years earlier.

The legal expert says she personally handled documents concerning communities in Reni and Hagi Curda (Komyshivka), Odesa region, where the procedures allegedly involved numerous members’ meetings, the preparation of minutes, amendments to statutes, and the resubmission of documents.

In the case of the Hagi Curda community, Kolesnychenko says it was registered as early as 2005 as an autonomous Orthodox community, without specifying an ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Subsequently, according to her account, several applications were submitted seeking legal recognition of its affiliation with the Romanian Orthodox Church, but the procedures were repeatedly rejected.

The Legal Question of Affiliation with an Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction

At the center of the legal expert’s argument is the question of whether Ukrainian legislation prohibits an Orthodox religious community from becoming canonically and organizationally affiliated with a church headquartered outside Ukraine.

Kolesnychenko invokes Article 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine, which guarantees freedom of conscience and religion and establishes the principle of separation between religious organizations and the state. In her interpretation, the state should not determine which religious jurisdiction is more appropriate for a community, provided that its choice remains within the limits of the law.

She also refers to Ukraine’s Law “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations”, which, she argues, allows religious communities to be subordinated, in canonical and organizational matters, to religious centers located both in Ukraine and abroad.

Specific Features of the Legislation Adopted after 2024

The legal expert’s analysis also takes into account legislative amendments adopted by Ukraine in the context of the war and relations between religious organizations and the Russian Federation.

After 2024, Ukrainian legislation introduced additional mechanisms concerning religious organizations associated with the aggressor state and imposed stricter regulations on institutional ties with Russian religious structures.

In this context, Kolesnychenko emphasizes the distinction between the Romanian Patriarchate and the Moscow Patriarchate, arguing that the affiliation of a Romanian Orthodox community with the Romanian Patriarchate cannot automatically be treated under the restrictions applicable to religious structures associated with Russia.

She also considers that the desire of some Romanian communities in the southern part of Odesa region to change their ecclesiastical affiliation predates Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

Establishment of the “Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine” Structure

The issue reached the national level in 2024. According to the material presented by Kolesnychenko, on 29 February 2024, the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church supported the establishment of a structure dedicated to Romanian Orthodox communities in Ukraine.

Subsequently, three Ukrainian religious communities established the Religious Association (Administration) “Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine” and approved the documents required for registration.

The registration application was reportedly submitted on 28 August 2024 to Ukraine’s State Service for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience (DESS).

According to the argument presented by Kolesnychenko, the organization is not seeking registration in Ukraine as a simple “branch” of a foreign church, but rather the establishment of a religious organization under Ukrainian law that would operate on Ukrainian territory while maintaining canonical and organizational unity with the Romanian Orthodox Church.

Legal Deadlines and the Issue of Delay

One of the main arguments put forward by the legal expert concerns the deadlines established under Ukrainian legislation for reviewing the documents of a religious organization.

Kolesnychenko argues that the legislation provides for applications to be reviewed within a specified period, with the possibility of an extension in cases where additional opinions or assessments are required, but also within the limits established by law.

In her view, the fact that the procedure initiated in August 2024 has allegedly not been completed to date raises a distinct legal issue. She argues that the authorities should either approve the registration or issue a reasoned refusal, specifically identifying the legal provision preventing registration and allowing the decision to be challenged in court.

Under this interpretation, inter-institutional consultations or dialogue between different church structures should not replace the administrative procedure established by law.

Consultations between Authorities and Church Representatives

During the period in which the registration procedure remained unresolved, Ukrainian authorities held consultations regarding the possible organizational arrangements for Romanian Orthodox communities.

According to the material analyzed by Kolesnychenko, these discussions also addressed the possibility of organizing Romanian communities in the form of a Romanian Vicariate within the Orthodox Church of Ukraine.

The legal expert considers that such proposals may constitute legitimate subjects of dialogue between church structures, but argues that the state should maintain a neutral position regarding the choice of religious jurisdiction by believers.

In her view, the question of the suitability of a particular church structure should be separated from the issue of compliance with administrative procedures and legally guaranteed rights.

Arguments Concerning Religious Freedom

Kolesnychenko also extends her analysis to Ukraine’s international obligations, invoking Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, concerning freedom of thought, conscience and religion, as well as Article 11 on freedom of association.

In this context, she refers to the case of “Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova”. In its judgment of 13 December 2001, the European Court of Human Rights found that the Moldovan authorities’ refusal to officially recognize the Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia constituted an interference with the exercise of religious freedom guaranteed by Article 9 of the Convention.

The case is relevant to the legal expert’s analysis because the Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia is an Orthodox structure linked to the Romanian Patriarchate. However, the ECHR precedent concerns the legal situation in the Republic of Moldova and does not automatically determine how the current registration procedure in Ukraine should be resolved.

European Case Law Cited in the Argument

In her analysis, Kolesnychenko also mentions the case of “Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria”, which has been used in European case law in the context of the autonomy of religious communities and the state’s obligation to maintain neutrality toward different religious groups.

Her argument seeks to emphasize that public authorities must strike a balance between the public interest, national legislation, and the right of religious communities to organize themselves.

The legal expert also refers to the case of “St Michael Parish v. Ukraine”, which she considers relevant to the analysis of the relationship between state authorities and the autonomy of religious organizations.

These precedents do not, however, constitute a direct legal solution to the current registration procedure; rather, they are invoked by the author as reference points for interpreting the principles of religious freedom and community autonomy.

The Relationship between Religious Identity and Romanian Communities

Beyond the strictly administrative aspect, the situation also has a component related to the cultural and linguistic identity of Romanian communities in Ukraine.

According to its presentation, the structure proposed by the Romanian Patriarchate seeks to support the religious life of Romanian Orthodox believers, preserve the use of the Romanian language in religious services, and develop educational, cultural and charitable activities.

In this context, the dispute over the legal form and ecclesiastical jurisdiction intersects with communities’ concerns about preserving their identity and cultural ties with Romania.

The Current Legal Status of the Structure

According to information made public by the organization, the Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine continues to be listed as a structure “in the process of organization”. Three founding communities are identified, from Chernivtsi, Hagi Curda and Reni.

Representatives of the organization claim that, after the application was submitted in August 2024, they received responses from the authorities referring to consultations and additional assessments, without the procedure being finalized.

According to the information cited in the material, the organization subsequently resorted to legal proceedings, and on 2 December 2025 an administrative litigation case was reportedly initiated in Kyiv. Representatives of the structure argue that the delay is unjustified and invoke the rights to religious freedom and freedom of association, as well as the protection of national minority identities.

An Issue Extending Beyond an Administrative Procedure

The case of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Ukraine thus lies at the intersection of legislation governing religious organizations, freedom of conscience, state policy on religious security, and the rights of national communities.

For Olga Kolesnychenko, the central issue is not choosing between different Orthodox jurisdictions, but rather how the state applies its own legislation. In her interpretation, if there is a legal obstacle to registering the organization, it should be specifically identified and reasoned, while if no such obstacle exists, the administrative procedure should be resolved in accordance with the law.

At the same time, Ukrainian authorities and the church structures involved have their own considerations regarding security, the organization of religious communities, and relations between different Orthodox jurisdictions. These factors make the issue a sensitive one, in which legal, religious, cultural and diplomatic aspects intersect.

At its core, the debate focuses on a fundamental legal question: under what conditions can the Ukrainian state limit or delay the recognition of a religious organization that seeks to operate within national legislation while maintaining canonical ties with a religious center outside the country?

The answer to this question will depend on the interpretation of the applicable Ukrainian legislation, the decisions of the competent authorities and, if the dispute continues in court, on how judges assess the relationship between religious freedom, administrative procedures and the interests of the state.