Article examines criminal legislation affecting memory politics in Ukraine, suggesting ideological implications.
The article examines the evolution of punitive memory politics in Ukraine between 2006 and 2025, focusing on the emergence, institutionalization, and enforcement of criminal legislation targeting public interpretations and representations of the past. It identifies a shift from symbolic commemoration to mnemonic coercion, marked by laws penalizing denial, trivialization, or alternative readings of canonical historical narratives, particularly those concerning the Holodomor, Communist symbols, and World War II. Tracing the genealogy of Article 436-1 of Ukraine’s Criminal Code and its amendments, the article demonstrates how memory laws have been instrumentalized across different political regimes for ideological, pragmatic, and securitarian ends. The article highlights the central role of nationalist memory activists, state institutions, and shifting geopolitical contexts, such as Russia’s hybrid war and full-scale invasion, in driving the radicalization of Ukraine’s historical policy. Based on extensive legal, institutional, and judicial data, it critically assesses the selective and disproportionate application of these laws, revealing a pattern of legal repression disproportionately affecting marginalized populations rather than ideological opponents. This punitive turn, the article argues, reflects both domestic political calculations and broader post-Communist trends toward state-enforced historical orthodoxy at the expense of pluralism, scholarly debate, and civil liberties.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Georgiy Kasianov (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: