By Volodymyr Servetnyk, Expert on Public Administration and Veterans’ Policy, PhD in Public Management and Administration, Doctoral Student, War Veteran. Lecturer at the Kyiv-Mohyla School of Public Administration, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (NaUKMA), and Chair of the Board of the NGO “Zvytiazhtsi”.

 

Veterans’ councils under local governments are gradually becoming an integral part of local veterans’ policy. They provide a platform for dialogue between veterans and the authorities, facilitating the identification of problems, the preparation of proposals, and the representation of the interests of the veterans’ community.

However, setting up a council is much easier than ensuring it has an impact.

The regulations may stipulate the right to attend meetings, receive information, establish working groups and make recommendations. Membership can be approved, a chairperson elected, and regular meetings held. However, none of this addresses the fundamental question of which specific local government decisions have been altered as a result of the work of the veterans’ council?

Here, there is a gap between the formal existence of the council and its actual influence.

The council has been established, but what happened next?

A study conducted by the “Right to Protection” Charitable Fund in 2025, which surveyed 69 communities in Vinnytsia and Dnipropetrovsk regions, showed that 18 of them had active veterans’ councils. However, only 12% of community representatives surveyed rated the level of involvement of veterans and their family members in local decision-making highly. These figures are not representative of Ukraine as a whole and are based on the community representatives' own assessments. However, they reveal an important trend: the existence of a veterans’ council does not guarantee a high level of participation by veterans in policy-making.

A similar result is yielded by an analysis of publicly available information on veterans’ councils under local governments. Official websites generally confirm the establishment of a council, its membership and terms of reference, and the holding of meetings. However, it is considerably more difficult to trace the full chain of events:

veterans’ issue – council recommendation – official response from the authorities – amended decision – practical outcome:

This does not mean that the councils are inactive. They may exert some influence through working meetings, informal consultations, direct access to the mayor or by making amendments to a document before it is published. However, without a record of the councils’ recommendations and the authorities’ responses, the community cannot assess the council's effectiveness.

Therefore, the number of councils established, meetings held, and memoranda signed should not be used as the primary indicator of effectiveness.

Is advisory status a weakness or a normal feature?

A veterans' council attached to a local government does not constitute a governing body. It cannot manage the budget independently, make binding decisions, provide administrative or social services, or replace the relevant departmental unit.

Its decisions are advisory in nature. This is not necessarily a shortcoming. In democratic systems, advisory bodies are not intended to take over the responsibilities of the elected council, executive committee or mayor.

The problem arises when this advisory status means the authorities are not obliged to act.

While the Law of Ukraine “On Local Self-Government in Ukraine” permits the establishment of consultative and advisory bodies, it does not set out a specific nationwide standard for the operation of veterans’ councils under local governments. There are no uniform mandatory requirements for their formation, resource allocation, timeframes for considering recommendations or reporting on their implementation. Thus, the actual scope of a council’s powers depends on the regulations adopted by the relevant community and the local authorities’ willingness to comply with them.

For instance, the regulations governing the Veterans’ Council in Khmelnytskyi entitle it to receive information from the city council and its executive bodies, invite officials, set up working groups, and participate in meetings. However, implementing its recommendations still requires a separate decision or instruction from a competent authority.

The Ukrainka City Council in Kyiv region has taken this a step further: the executive committee must consider the council’s recommendations and provide a reasoned written response within 30 calendar days.

This structure appears to be the most balanced. While a recommendation does not have to be binding in terms of implementation, it must be in terms of consideration. If the authorities reject a proposal, they must provide a reasoned explanation.

Influence begins before a decision is adopted

The council's broad powers enshrined in the regulations are of little help if it only receives draft programmes, budgets and decisions after they have already been agreed by officials and political leaders.

At this stage, consultation merely involves commenting on a finished document. While the council can express its position, there is almost no scope left for making changes.

The OECD identifies the early involvement of citizens as a key condition for meaningful participation. Consultations that are carried out “too late and on too small a scale” do not provide participants with a genuine opportunity to influence policy substance. It is equally important that participants are competent and that the authorities demonstrate how the proposals received have influenced the final decision.

Therefore, the right of a member of the veterans’ council to attend a meeting of the executive or council committee is not the decisive factor. What matters is whether the council receives a draft document before it is politically approved, whether it has time to analyse it and whether it can propose a specific alternative.

Veterans’ experience is not the same as knowledge of public processes

Being a member of the veterans’ council involves representing the experiences and needs of veterans. However, this alone is not enough to influence decision-making processes.

It is also necessary to understand how the local budget is drawn up, who has the right to initiate a draft resolution, and which matters fall within the remit of the council, the executive committee or the mayor. It is also important to understand how targeted programmes, regulatory acts, requests for information and the monitoring of implementation work.

Having military experience, being respected by fellow veterans or taking an active civic stance does not automatically mean that one is proficient in using these tools. This is not a criticism of veterans. For many of them, serving on a veterans’ council may be their first experience of engaging with public policy.

The 2026 guide by the CHESNO Movement explicitly states that serving on veterans’ and community councils is the first experience of policy-making for many veterans.

While the Razumkov Centre’s study does not directly evaluate the competence of members of veterans’ councils, it does highlight a broader issue. In an expert survey, 77.4% of respondents deemed the political education of veterans in Ukraine to be in its infancy and lacking a systematic approach. The main obstacles cited were a lack of funding and material resources, a shortage of competent programme developers and trainers, and the absence of adapted training programmes.

Ihor Iliushkin, First Deputy Chair of the Veterans’ Council under the Ministry of Veterans’ Affairs, made a telling comment:

‘We need to conduct a proper analysis and create a platform for communication so that we can assess our effectiveness, rather than simply getting together.’

This refers to the national council, rather than a body under the local government. However, the same problem exists at different levels: the council must gather information and transform it into reasoned proposals, as well as evaluate its own performance.

Ivan Chyhyryn, Chair of the Holosiivskyi District Veterans’ Council in Kyiv, describes a similar approach at the local level. He says that people turn to the council for help with drafting reports, representation in court, and other individual matters. The council’s role is to gather data, distinguish between systemic and individual problems, and develop a response mechanism.

This is where the distinction lies between a public reception centre and an advisory body. The council should not try to solve every individual problem alone. Its added value lies in identifying the systemic problems behind individual cases and suggesting changes to rules, programmes, procedures, or budgetary priorities.

In order to achieve this, councils require training in local self-government, the budgetary process, policy and data analysis, drafting recommendations, advocacy, and preventing conflicts of interest. However, training alone cannot compensate for a lack of information or the authorities’ unwillingness to respond.

Who authorised the council to represent all veterans?

The veterans’ community is not homogeneous. It comprises veterans from different generations, female veterans, disabled veterans, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and representatives of different units, civil society organisations and unorganised veterans not belonging to any associations.

Therefore, even a council of respected veterans cannot automatically be regarded as the voice of the entire community.

This issue is particularly evident when different veterans’ organisations put forward different representatives or claim the exclusive right to speak on behalf of veterans.

The situation in Odesa was particularly striking. As early as April 2026, even before the Veterans’ Council had been formally established, representatives of several organisations demanded that Vadym Shypulin, a veteran, be included on the executive committee. At the time, Maksym Zhyvanov, a representative of the veterans’ community, commented:

‘I don’t understand why issues concerning veterans are discussed in their absence.’

However, the city authorities stated that there were other candidates and called on the veterans’ community to reach a consensus.

The Odesa Veterans’ Council was established on 29 May. In July, the dispute over veterans’ representation on the executive committee flared up again. In August, the council itself selected three other candidates for further consideration by the councillors in an open ballot.

This incident does not prove that the Odesa Council is ineffective. In fact, it demonstrates an attempt to channel the conflict between different groups into a formalised procedure. However, it also highlights the importance of transparent selection criteria, open meetings, and clear connections between the council and the wider veterans’ community.

Without these, the council risks becoming an exclusive group comprising only the most active organisations or individuals with close ties to the local authorities.

A council without a secretariat depends on voluntary work

Members of a veterans’ council are often expected to represent the community, identify needs, analyse draft decisions, prepare recommendations, organise meetings, take minutes, liaise with the authorities, and monitor implementation, all at the same time.

For a voluntary organisation, this represents a significant amount of unpaid work.

Without at least an administrative secretariat provided by the local government, the council becomes dependent on the spare time and personal motivation of a few active members. Should these members become burnt out or leave, the council’s activities may stall.

Having a secretariat does not mean setting up a separate local government institution. At the very least, it refers to a designated official who manages document flow, ensures access to draft decisions, organises meetings, publishes materials and monitors response times.

Without this support, even a strong council remains a weak institution.

How to distinguish between activity and influence

News about the inaugural meeting is much easier to find on the official websites of local government than documents showing what happened to the council’s recommendations.

The Zaporizhzhia Veterans’ Council’s website, for example, features documents on the body’s establishment and minutes of meetings. This represents a basic level of transparency. However, the minutes alone do not enable one to trace the entire process from proposal to amended decision and practical outcome.

At the same time, there are examples of more substantial work. The Veterans’ Council under the Mykolaiv Regional Council, for instance, reports on regular visits to communities, meetings with veterans, the collection of proposals, and the provision of feedback. The council then uses this information to update the “Veterans’ Roadmap” and formulate proposals for regional policy.

This is a description of the regional council’s activities rather than an independent evaluation of its effectiveness. However, it illustrates what an ongoing working process might entail: identifying needs, organising them, creating a specific output, gathering feedback and utilising the findings in the decision-making process.

To evaluate the veterans’ council, it is necessary to consider not only the number of meetings, but also the following indicators:

• how many recommendations the council has officially submitted;
• how many of these received a reasoned response;
• how many were fully or partially taken into account;
• which programmes, procedures or budgetary decisions have changed;
• which administrative barriers have been removed;
• whether veterans outside the council can see the results and make their own proposals.

The simplest tool would be a public register containing the following information: the issue; the council’s recommendation; the recipient; the authorities’ response; the status of implementation; and a link to the amended document.

What makes a council effective

The effectiveness of a veterans’ council cannot be determined by a single factor. Influential members cannot compensate for a lack of access to documents. Training will be ineffective if the authorities do not respond to proposals. While the mayor’s support may yield quick results, without proper procedures in place, the council will become dependent on a single official.

In order to have a real impact, a combination of conditions is required:

Early access to decisions. The council receives draft programmes, budgets and regulations before they are finally approved.

A mandatory, reasoned response. If the authorities disagree with a recommendation, they must explain their decision within a set timeframe.

Secretariat. A designated local government employee manages document flow, organises the council’s work and monitors implementation.

Competence of members. The council has the necessary tools to analyse problems, prepare local budgets, make decisions and advocate.

Open representation. The composition and selection procedure prevent any single organisation or group from monopolising the voice of veterans.

A public record of influence. Recommendations, responses and outcomes can be verified rather than merely read about in an official report.

International models confirm precisely this approach. For instance, in Canada, the thematic advisory groups of Veterans Affairs Canada have co-chairs who represent both participants and the government body. Representatives from the Office of the Veterans’ Ombudsman may also attend as observers. Recommendations are drawn up alongside an explanation of the issue, supporting evidence, and expected outcomes. While this does not turn the advisory group into a governing body, it does ensure that its work is structured and transparent.

A council cannot create its own influence

The debate over the effectiveness of veterans’ councils can easily descend into mutual accusations. Authorities may accuse council members of being passive or unprofessional, while council members may accuse officials of ignoring them and adopting a perfunctory attitude.

However, a council’s effectiveness cannot be explained solely by the personal qualities of its members or the goodwill of the mayor. Rather, it is the result of its institutional structure.

Without early access to draft decisions, administrative support, the opportunity to receive reasoned responses and the ability to prepare high-quality proposals, even strong and influential veterans risk becoming mere participants in regular meetings with no real influence.

At the same time, veteran status alone cannot replace professional training. The right to be heard and the ability to turn a problem into a management decision are not the same thing. An effective council must combine both.

Therefore, the development of veterans’ councils should not be measured by the number of bodies established or meetings held.

The real test is both simpler and more complex: identify a decision that would have been different if the veterans’ council had not existed.

If such a decision can be identified and the council’s role explained, along with the outcome for veterans, then there is an impact.

However, if the council exists but cannot answer this question, then it is not yet an influential institution, merely one with the potential to become one.