Ukrainian MPs made more than a thousand amendments to the new billon mobilisation. To consider them, the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security will spend at least a week.
The bill on mobilisation will be voted on in the Verkhovna Rada no earlier than March
MPs continue to amend the new bill on mobilisation in Ukraine.
Roman Kostenko, secretary of the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security, Defense and Intelligence, said about it.
Tomorrow, February 21, is the last day when people's deputies can amend the draft law on mobilisation in Ukraine.
As of now, more than 1,000 amendments have been made. According to my estimate, the committee will need at least a week to process them. Therefore, I assume this document can be put to a vote in the hall before the second reading no earlier than the beginning of March.
Roman Kostenko
Ukraine's MP
The first reading of the bill on mobilisation
On February 7, the Verkhovna Rada approved the bill on strengthening mobilisation in the first reading. Two hundred forty-three people's deputies supported the draft law, 12 voted against and 45 abstained.
Previously, the Deputy Chairman of the Council's Committee on National Security, Defence and Intelligence, Yehor Chernev, pointed out at least two controversial points related to people with disabilities, including the third group, and subpoenas on the electronic cabinet.
After the bill was adopted in the first reading, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine announced that during the preparation of the document on mobilisation for the second reading, the team of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine would work out with the specialised committee of the Verkhovna Rada all proposals for improving the law.
In addition, the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, Dmytro Lubinets, pointed out the contradiction of the norms in the bill.
The new bill on mobilisation was submitted to the Verkhovna Rada on January 30 after finalisation. It is the second attempt to change the norms of mobilisation in Ukraine. At the same time, there were fewer questions about the second document than about its first version.
