Fines for Identifying a Lawyer with a Client New Law in Ukraine 

1. New Legal Landscape: What Has Changed?
   On July 16, 2025, the Verkhovna Rada adopted Law of Ukraine No. 12320 “On Amendments to the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses and the Criminal Code of Ukraine to Ensure the Guarantees of Advocacy Activities.” The law was a response to numerous calls from the legal community regarding pressure, discrediting, and public identification of lawyers with their clients—practices that contradict international standards of independence for the legal profession and guarantees of professional activity.
   Legislation was supplemented with a new Article 185-16 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, which for the first time defines administrative liability for public identification of a lawyer with their client (in media, on the internet, in social networks, or via public organizations), even without a clear intent to hinder defense or representation.
2. Essence and Sanctions: How the New Mechanism Works
   What is “identifying a lawyer with a client”?
   This now-prohibited identification means any public disclosure or mention—analysis of cases, associations of the lawyer with the actions, views, or reputation of their client.
   What are the fines?
   For individuals: from 3,400 to 5,100 UAH.
   For officials: from 5,100 to 6,800 UAH.
   Repeated offenses: from 10,200 to 13,600 UAH.
   Protocols may be drawn up by authorized representatives of bar self-governance bodies.
   A key detail: the fine is imposed even if the identification occurred without the aim of hindering the lawyer in fulfilling their professional duties.
   The law also updates Article 397 of the Criminal Code—clarifying which actions are considered criminal violations of guarantees of advocacy activity (e.g., interference in a lawyer’s work).
3. Motives and Rationale
   Professional independence of the lawyer is the basis of a fair trial and a guarantee of the constitutional right to defense.
   Cases of obstruction, harassment, and slander against lawyers are known, undermining clients’ opportunities for effective defense, especially in high-profile political or criminal cases.
   The law harmonizes national standards with European models: in the EU there is a strict ban on identifying a lawyer with a client, both in legal and informal (media) discussions.
4. Debate and Criticism: Risks for Journalism and Society
   The legal and lawyer community generally supports the law, emphasizing the importance of protecting the legal profession, the constitutional right to legal assistance, and preventing lawyers from becoming “second-level suspects.”
   At the same time, civil society and human rights activists have raised several concerns:

• The law could be used to pressure journalists who mention in articles whom a lawyer represents, even without evaluative language or compromising information.
• Risk of restriction of freedom of speech. Even publishing the phrase “___ is the lawyer for ___” could entail administrative or even criminal liability.
• Danger of formalism and “blind spots,” when even factual journalistic information without evaluation may be interpreted as identification and result in fines.
  A draft resolution to repeal or revise the law has already been submitted to Parliament, and several media and human rights organizations are asking the President to veto the initiative.

5. Problematic Aspects of Application

• Clarity of definitions: The law lacks an exhaustive definition of “identification”; the final qualification falls to lawyer self-government bodies and the court, creating a risk of arbitrary interpretation of each publication.
• Journalistic standards versus protection of advocacy: balancing freedom to disseminate public information (e.g. who represents whom) and guarantees of lawyer independence.
• Appeal mechanisms: Are equal protections provided for journalists and public figures who may be accused of violations?

6. Conclusions: Impact on Ukraine’s Legal Ecosystem
   For the first time, Ukraine introduces effective administrative fines for discrediting and violating the independence of a lawyer.
   The law demonstrates respect for attorney-client confidentiality and the obligation of the state to protect lawyers from all forms of pressure—both legally and in public discourse.
   However, without further clarifications in practice and harmonization with journalists’ rights, the risk of imbalance between protecting advocacy and censoring freedom of speech remains high.
   In the near future, the law’s effectiveness will depend on judicial practice, the positions of the Constitutional Court, and potential changes considering the interests of civil society and the legal profession.

Analytical summary: The law is an attempt to address urgent challenges to lawyer protection amid hybrid war and social polarization. However, for true protection of guaranteed freedoms it must be implemented cautiously, with an understanding of the Ukrainian context and without restricting the freedom of journalism and democratic oversight.

This material was prepared in accordance with the latest legislation, publications by specialized lawyers, NAU analysis, human rights advocates, and expert opinions of leading media as of July 2025.
Author: Ihor Yas’ko, Managing Partner of the Law Firm “WINNER,” PhD in Law.