This publication provides an analysis of the current state of one of the areas of public administration reform — Effective Governance.
Digitalisation of the human resource management system, as a key element of rebooting public administration, is implemented in accordance with the Strategy for Public Administration Reform in Ukraine for 2022–2025 under the area ‘Professional Civil Service and Personnel Management’.
One of the directions of the Public Administration Reform Strategy for 2022–2025 (hereinafter — the Strategy) is Effective Governance, which entails creating conditions under which government bodies shape state policy based on analytical results and communication with stakeholders, as well as ensuring its implementation for the sustainable development of the state. Key challenges in this area include the insufficiently effective system of central executive authorities, the lack of a clear division between policy development and policy implementation, an imperfect mechanism for directing and coordinating the activities of ministries, and the unregulated system of state strategic planning. The Strategy stipulates that ministries should focus on policy development, assigning the relevant powers to directorates, while delegating policy implementation functions to other central executive bodies.
The separation of policy development and implementation functions between ministries and other central executive authorities is also outlined in the Public Administration Reform Roadmap, which is one of the key documents under Cluster 1: Fundamentals in Ukraine’s EU accession negotiations. The Roadmap sets the strategic goal for Ukraine to achieve by the end of 2026: ministries are focused on policy development, possess optimal institutional capacity, and effectively use human resources, while policy implementation functions (such as managing state-owned enterprises or providing services) are transferred to other central executive authorities. To achieve this, a range of measures is envisaged, including the introduction of a unified structure for ministries.
Another issue identified in the Strategy is the flawed procedure for establishing and dissolving central executive authorities, particularly the inadequate justification for their creation and the unclear definition of their areas of competence. Additionally, the lack of a clearly defined legal succession mechanism leads to problems related to the transfer of property obligations from a dissolved authority and ensuring the proper execution of functions reassigned to another central executive authority. As a result, the principle of continuity of public authority is violated, and the process of dissolving central executive authorities sometimes takes years.
The tasks for implementing this aspect of the Strategy include:
- improving the organisation and procedures of central executive authorities, including enhancing mechanisms for guidance and coordination, organisational structure, clearly defining and distributing functions and powers, eliminating duplication, and introducing accountability for their performance;
- streamlining the procedures for establishing and dissolving central executive authorities as legal entities of public law, as well as defining a clear legal succession mechanism in case of changes within the system of central executive authorities;
- continuing the process of relieving ministries of non-core functions and powers, particularly by reallocating such functions and powers to other central executive authorities or transferring them to local executive authorities or local self-government bodies as part of decentralisation efforts, or even discontinuing state involvement in their execution.
However, no indicators have been defined for these tasks that would allow tracking progress in their implementation.
State of Play and Progress of Reform
Repeated announcements by the Prime Minister regarding plans to reduce the number of ministries have not been implemented. Instead, only name changes and redistribution of competences within the Government are carried out, or new policy areas emerge that require regulation. For example, following the reorganisation of the Ministry of Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine, some of its powers were transferred to the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine. The emergence of new areas of state policy, where ministries are responsible for policy development and implementation, is a natural result of evolving societal relations and technological advancements. A clear example is the Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine being granted powers to ensure the development and implementation of state policy in the field of artificial intelligence.
Architecture of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, ministries, and other central executive authorities
The creation, reorganisation, and liquidation of ministries and other central executive authorities in accordance with the law fall under the constitutional powers of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. However, frequent, unjustified, or poorly reasoned changes in the system of central executive authorities, in their guidance and coordination schemes, and the redistribution of competences destabilise the work of ministries and other central executive authorities, forcing them to readjust their operations to new conditions. This negatively affects citizens and businesses, creating uncertainty and unpredictability in public policy planning and undermining trust in the institutional capacity of the Government.
For instance, in December 2024, the renaming of the Ministry of Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine into the Ministry of National Unity of Ukraine was accompanied by the transfer of some powers of the former Ministry of Reintegration to the Ministry for Development of Communities and Territories of Ukraine and the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine. Some functions were left without a clearly defined responsibility, leading to a ‘governmental vacuum’ in the area of protecting the rights of internally displaced persons, as noted by both authorities and civil society representatives.
The current Procedure for Implementing Measures stipulates that executive authorities are established, reorganised, or liquidated by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine upon submission of the Prime Minister of Ukraine, based on a proposal from a member of the Cabinet of Ministers. Such proposals should consider Government priorities and the need to ensure the exercise of executive powers, avoid duplication of competences, and include justification for the feasibility of establishing, reorganising, or liquidating the body, along with relevant financial and economic calculations. However, the decision to establish the Ministry of National Unity was influenced more by political motives than by a substantiated need for a new ministry.
The areas where the Ministry of National Unity ensures the development and implementation of state policy, as defined in its regulations, lack legal definitions in Ukrainian legislation. This applies, in particular, to such matters as ‘national unity of Ukraine and joint development’ and ‘Ukrainian national self-awareness’. In December 2022, the Verkhovna Rada adopted the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Fundamentals of State Policy in the Field of Affirming National and Civic Identity’, and later the Government designated the Ministry of Youth and Sports as the central executive authority responsible for developing and implementing state policy in this area. The Ministry of National Unity was tasked with ‘promoting the establishment of Ukrainian national identity and Ukrainian civic identity’. This raises an open question: what exactly constitutes ‘Ukrainian national self-awareness’ or ‘national unity’, as these terms are not defined in legal acts, leaving room for broad interpretation of the responsibilities of the ministry.
Additionally, the new ministry’s activities aim at ensuring the rights and interests of Ukrainian citizens abroad and creating conditions for their return to Ukraine. This partially duplicates the powers of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, which is responsible for protecting the rights and interests of Ukrainian citizens abroad.
Also, the role of the ministry in ensuring information policy regarding the unity of Ukraine and strategic communications (within its powers regarding national unity of Ukraine) overlaps with the powers of the Ministry of Culture and Strategic Communications of Ukraine. However, the absence of a clear definition of ‘national unity of Ukraine’ calls into question the division of competencies between these ministries in the field of information policy and strategic communications.
An analysis of the regulations of the Ministry of National Unity suggests that the ministry has limited autonomy in implementing some of its powers. For example, it works jointly with the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine to facilitate education for Ukrainians abroad and cooperates with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to engage with organisations and media to protect the interests of these citizens.
Currently, the existence of the Ministry of National Unity is in question, in particular due to the criminal charges of abuse of office and illicit enrichment on a particularly large scale brought against Vice Prime Minister of Ukraine and Minister of National Unity, Oleksii Chernyshov, as well as the relatively low effectiveness Although the number of regulatory acts issued cannot be an indicator of the effectiveness of this ministry, it is worth noting that the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine has registered only one order during the entire period of the Ministry of National Unity’s activity — regarding the criteria for determining enterprises, institutions, and organisations belonging to its sphere of management as those that are important for the national economy, which allows for the reservation of employees of such enterprises, institutions, and organisations who are subject to military service. of the ministry.
As part of the implementation of the Strategy, procedures for the establishment and dissolution of central executive authorities have been streamlined at the procedural level through the adoption of the Law of Ukraine ‘On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine in Connection with the Adoption of the Law of Ukraine “On Administrative Procedure”’. This Law introduced changes to the Law of Ukraine ‘On Central Executive Authorities’, clarifying the procedure for transferring powers and functions from an existing ministry or other central executive authority to a newly established one, as well as the procedure for transferring powers and functions without establishing a new authority. In addition, the Law requires that the relevant act of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine determine the legal successors of the property, rights, and obligations of a ministry or other executive authority subject to liquidation.
The lack of a clearly formulated policy on the organisation of the Government and the role of central executive authorities complicates the reform of individual ministries, the system of central executive authorities, and the Government as a whole. On the one hand, unjustified reorganisations of ministries lead to duplication of functions. On the other hand, they create a ‘governmental vacuum’, waste state resources, and halt the formation and implementation of state policy.
The architecture of the public administration system is not discussed with the public. Additionally, the Law of Ukraine ‘On Legislative Activity’ and the Law of Ukraine ‘On Public Consultations’ exclude legal acts related to the establishment or dissolution of state authorities from their scope. As a result, the establishment or dissolution of a new authority does not require an assessment of its impact on social relations or the conduct of public consultations with stakeholders.
Another aspect of the reform is the delineation of functions related to the development and implementation of policy between ministries and other central executive authorities. In May 2021, the Government submitted Draft Law No. 5469 to Parliament, proposing changes to the procedures governing the preparation of draft regulatory legal acts by ministries and other central executive authorities that are directed and coordinated by the Government through the relevant minister. The draft law provided that such central executive authorities would lose the competence to develop and submit regulatory legal acts (e.g., draft laws) for consideration by the relevant minister. Instead, they would submit proposals to the minister to support policy formation and, at the minister’s request, ensure the participation of their representatives in the preparation of regulatory legal acts. The proposed amendments aimed to ensure that only ministries could engage in policy development (or at least in the development of policy documents). Importantly, the Draft Law also sought to clarify the areas of state policy and areas of activity for which the Government would be responsible, with the distribution of competencies among Government members covering all areas and directions of its activity. In September 2021, the Main Committee The Committee on Organisation of State Power, Local Self-Government, Regional Development and Urban Planning has been designated as the main committee for the preparation and preliminary consideration of the draft law. issued a revised opinion on the Draft Law, recommending its adoption as a basis in the first reading, with subsequent refinement in preparation for the second reading. In September 2024, the Draft Law was withdrawn by its initiator. Despite this, its adoption remains one of the measures set out in the Strategy Implementation Plan.
At present, most central executive authorities directed and coordinated by the Government through respective ministers are responsible only for the implementation of state policy and for submitting proposals to the respective ministers on developing/ensuring the development of state policy. The only exception is the Ukrainian State Film Agency (hereinafter — USFA). In November 2021, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine decided to transfer the direction and coordination of USFA activities from the Minister of Culture and Information Policy of Ukraine directly to the Cabinet of Ministers. As a result, USFA was granted direct authority to exercise legal and regulatory functions in the field of cinematography, including the adoption of regulatory legal acts in this area. In March 2023, the traditional core function of such central executive authorities (‘submitting proposals for ensuring the development of state policy’) was replaced with ‘ensuring the development of state policy in the field of cinematography’. Consequently, the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy of Ukraine lost one of its competencies — the field of cinematography — which was transferred to USFA. However, in February 2025, a reverse process took place: USFA was returned under the oversight of the Ministry of Culture and Strategic Communications of Ukraine The Ministry of Culture and Information Policy of Ukraine was renamed the Ministry of Culture and Strategic Communications of Ukraine in September 2024. (hereinafter — MCSC), which regained its authority to ensure the development and implementation of state policy in the field of cinematography and to exercise legal and regulatory functions in this area. The new regulations governing USFA excluded its authority to exercise legal and regulatory functions in the field of cinematography. However, its task of ensuring the development of state policy in cinematography remained unchanged, leading to duplication and competition with similar functions of the ministry now overseeing USFA.
The recent ‘experiments’, such as the establishment of the Ministry of National Unity and the redistribution of competencies between MCSC and the Government regarding the coordination of USFA, demonstrate the lack of a strategic vision for the system of central executive authorities in connection with state policy areas. There is no established tradition of relations between ministries and their subordinate central executive authorities that would clearly define the scope of autonomy and accountability of such authorities to the respective ministries. Ministries should function Johnsøn, J., L. Marcinkowski and D. Sześciło (2021), ‘Organisation of public administration: Agency governance, autonomy and accountability’, SIGMA Papers, No. 63, OECD Publishing, Paris. as the primary centres for state policy development, while other central executive authorities should focus on collecting and providing data on the implementation of laws and policies, as well as offering comments and proposals on ministerial initiatives.
Internal Organisation of Ministries
Aligning the organisational structure of ministries with established requirements remains one of the measures of the Public Administration Reform Strategy Implementation Plan. The creation of directorates within ministries as structural units responsible for policy development, coordination, and monitoring of its implementation, as well as the creation of a separate Directorate for Strategic Planning and European Integration, was one of the key objectives outlined in the Concept for Optimising the System of Central Executive Authorities and the Concept for Introducing Reform Support Specialist Positions. These directorates were intended to become the central hubs for policy development and strategic planning within ministries.
Draft Law No. 5469 proposed to Currently, the typical structure of the central executive authorities is defined in a resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. legally formalise the structure of the apparatus of the ministry, consisting of directorates and a secretariat, while also allowing for the creation of other independent structural units (departments, administrations, etc.) and the introduction of positions outside the framework of these structural units.
The 2023 SIGMA Report provides a critical assessment of the ministry structure reform. It notes that the establishment of directorates has led to the creation of parallel, sometimes even competing, units (directorates and departments) within certain ministries, failing to achieve the goal of building capacity for reform development and implementation due to weak institutional support. Since 2021, the number of directorates in most ministries has been steadily decreasing.
In April 2024, the Coordination Council on Public Administration Reform presented an improved model structure for the apparatus of the ministry. It proposed the creation of structural units along three main lines of work: 1) units for policy development and implementation (directorates); 2) units for specific functions related to policy implementation (departments and divisions responsible for administrative services, management of state-owned assets, etc.); 3) support units (secretariat). However, legislative changes necessary to ensure the implementation of this structure have not yet been adopted, and the creation of new directorates within ministries has been temporarily suspended.
Recommendations
- Ensure the decision-making on the establishment, reorganisation, or dissolution of central executive authorities based on impact assessment, not just political considerations. For instance, such decisions should be preceded by: 1) functional analysis of existing authorities to assess whether the proposed functions could be assigned to an authority operating in a related policy area; 2) evaluation of the potential effectiveness of planned changes to ensure that establishing, restructuring, or dissolving an institution is truly necessary and will not cause adverse consequences for citizens, businesses, or the state as a whole.
- Strengthen justification requirements for decisions related to changes in the system of central executive authorities.
- Consider engaging civil society and the business community in discussions concerning decisions on structural changes within the system of central executive authorities.
- Review and unify the internal structure of the apparatus of ministries and other central executive authorities. This will enhance policy development in areas of shared responsibility between multiple ministries and foster the development of horizontal linkages between them, which is a particularly important aspect in the context of Ukraine’s European integration. The updated structure should take into account the specific policy domains for which ministries are responsible and ensure an effective distribution of functions within the apparatus.
This publication has been prepared within the framework of the ‘Improvement of Governance in Ukraine: Enhancing Policy Making for Social Progress’ Project with the support of Switzerland. The content of this publication is the sole responsibility of the NGO ‘Agency for Legislative Initiatives’. The opinion of the authors does not necessarily reflect the views of the donor.
