Responding to the Supreme Court of Ukraine’s decision to uphold a lower court ruling recognizing a same-sex couple as a de facto family, Veronika Velch, Director of Amnesty International Ukraine, said:
“The Supreme Court’s refusal to overturn this ruling reaffirms the lower court’s important finding that same-sex couples have the right to be recognized as a family.
“This is a significant precedent. The court made clear that third-party organizations cannot use the courts to interfere in people’s private lives or attempt to overturn decisions protecting LGBTI people by invoking vague and absurd claims about ‘public morality’.
“The ruling also reinforces an important principle: the courts must protect individuals’ rights to private and family life and ensure that those rights cannot be undermined by actors seeking to impose discriminatory views through the legal system.
“While the decision does not introduce legal recognition of same-sex partnerships in Ukraine, it acknowledges the reality of a family relationship and represents an important step toward strengthening the protection of LGBTI people’s rights.”
While the decision does not introduce legal recognition of same-sex partnerships in Ukraine, it acknowledges the reality of a family relationship and represents an important step toward strengthening the protection of LGBTI people’s rights
Veronika Velch, Director of Amnesty International Ukraine
Background
The case concerns a Ukrainian diplomat posted to Israel, and his partner, a civil society activist.
In June 2024, after the diplomat was appointed to his overseas position, he attempted to travel with his partner as a member of his family. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine refused permission, citing Ukrainian legislation that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
Following the refusal, the couple brought the case before the courts. In June 2025, the Desnianskyi District Court of Kyiv established the fact that the two men live together as one family.
The civic movement “Vsі Razom!” later filed a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the decision.
The Supreme Court rejected the appeal, ruling that an organization that was not a party to the case and whose rights or obligations were not directly affected by the decision does not have standing to challenge it. As a result, the lower court’s decision remains in force.
