Liza Mazur is a Kyiv-based Ukrainian lawyer whose work focuses on migration, visas, citizenship, residence documents, and the legal challenges facing foreigners in Ukraine and Ukrainians abroad. She earned her bachelor’s degree in law from Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv in 2023 and pursued graduate studies in international law at its Institute of International Relations.

In this interview, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Mazur about practicing law during Russia’s full-scale invasion, the reach of martial law, military-related legal disputes, and the increasingly complicated rules governing migration and consular services. Mazur also discusses the pressures of speaking publicly about government policy and the practical difficulties of serving clients amid air-raid alerts and wartime bureaucracy.

This interview has been edited for length.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Has Russia’s full-scale invasion made you reconsider your career, or the kind of law you want to practice?

Liza Mazur: I wanted to change the field of law rather than change professions completely. As a migration lawyer, I want to continue working in areas connected with entry bans, migrants, refugees, temporary protection, consultation, and helping people with these legal processes.

I was working much more with visa applications and immigration documents than with martial law in Ukraine. Although I am a Ukrainian immigration lawyer and I am living in this situation, I need to understand military-related laws and how they apply to people affected by them.

I also need to help people with military-related legal issues and with obtaining money or benefits they may be entitled to. For example, some people are living in occupied territories, including families with a person with a disability, and they want to receive or recover payments from the Ukrainian government.

Sometimes government authorities say, “We cannot do that,” or tell them they need to go to court, that they don’t have enough evidence, or that their information isn’t in a Ukrainian state registry.

Then they need a lawyer who can represent their rights in court and help them obtain the payments or benefits they may be entitled to.

If you are a lawyer in Ukraine now, even if you do not specialize in these cases, you still need some understanding of the laws connected with martial law.

But it is also psychologically difficult because many people do not have much money. They need someone with humanity who can help them.

Sometimes a lawyer can take a percentage of the money recovered from the government, perhaps five percent of the result, because the person still needs most of that money to live.

I am giving this example because it is one of the most common types of cases now. People often call lawyers for help receiving government money or benefits.

Military personnel and others also need help with border-crossing issues, documents, or matters involving the TCC. Some need legal assistance in documenting medical conditions that may affect their fitness for military service.

They may be ready to pay, but these cases take a lot of time. You need to give them your attention, and then there is no time for migration law, no time to improve your English, and no time to meet your friends or family. You need to spend that time understanding martial-law legislation and helping people with military-related cases.

Because of this, at one point I wanted to change my profession completely. Now I turn those cases away, explaining that I do not practice in that area of law.

Jacobsen: Beyond the demands of individual cases, what personal or professional risks does practicing law during wartime create?

Mazur: The biggest risk is connected with what you talk about publicly, especially in the media.

Jacobsen: Does the risk arise primarily when lawyers speak publicly about sensitive government policies?

Mazur: About Russians, lawyers, and these issues, I do not know. This is actually one of my favourite topics because most of my clients now come from social media. They see what you are talking about, they see you on television, and then they want to consult with you. They may think, “This is a person who knows what she is talking about.”

But I cannot speak freely about every political topic. I also have to be careful when speaking publicly about problems in Ukrainian law. First, I am only 24 years old, and it can be easy for someone to come to me and say, “Could you please be silent?”

It can also be easy to create problems for a young lawyer if the government considers what you are saying politically sensitive.

Temporary protection in Europe is one example. There has been a major discussion about Ukrainian men and military documents when they apply for protection in European countries.

Politicians, political analysts, migration consultants, and other commentators living in Europe have recorded videos discussing the Ukrainian system and cooperation between Ukraine and European governments.

Claims have emerged that European governments are asking some Ukrainian men applying for temporary protection to provide documentation related to their military obligations.

This issue has become very controversial. Some Ukrainian men do not want to return to Ukraine or serve in the military because they believe the system is corrupt, or because they fear being stopped on the street and taken to a Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Centre.

For people applying for temporary protection now, European authorities may in some circumstances require evidence that they complied with Ukrainian military obligations when leaving the country. That is different from saying that every Ukrainian man in Europe must produce military documents in every situation.

This has become an important topic in both Europe and Ukraine. As a lawyer, I can discuss how to help people prepare the documents they need, defend their rights in Europe, and apply for temporary protection or refugee status where the legal conditions are met.

I can also explain what documents may be required and what legal arguments may be available if a person fears being returned to Ukraine.

But I cannot simply tell people that every requirement for military documentation is unlawful. The situation depends on the law that applies to the particular person and their status.

People also want to hear that someone is defending their rights. You can show that through social media by discussing possible human-rights concerns involving Ukraine or European governments.

But speaking publicly about politically sensitive issues can carry risks. If you make strong accusations against the Ukrainian authorities or other governments, you may attract attention from state institutions.

In Ukraine, for example, a lawyer or public commentator may worry about being contacted by the Security Service of Ukraine and asked to answer questions about public statements.

For example, someone may ask, “Do you have any connections with Russia? Why are you speaking about this? We are not violating human rights. There is martial law in Ukraine. These are rights and obligations. It is your obligation to show these documents.”

They may say, “Your right is to move freely on the roads. We are not taking away your documents or your rights. We are not breaking the law.”

The authorities may interpret the situation very differently. You may also feel pressure about what you say publicly so that you do not have problems with the Security Service of Ukraine, for example.

While living in Ukraine, you have to be careful when speaking about certain topics, especially martial law and issues that could be interpreted as strong criticism of the Ukrainian government. But people also want to hear someone willing to defend their rights.

For example, Ukrainian singer Olya Polyakova spoke critically about government policy and the treatment of people in encounters involving military recruitment officials during an interview with journalist Ramina Eshakzai.

Her comments reflected concerns about individual rights and the reluctance of bystanders to intervene in confrontations they do not fully understand.

Lawyers have an important role because they help people while also dealing directly with government institutions. They are often in the middle of these difficult situations.

We need to be diplomatic, but we are also defenders. Sometimes, when you are acting as a defender, you cannot always be diplomatic with the government. Sometimes you need to push the authorities to get results and protect a person’s rights.

For example, an authority may unlawfully refuse to issue a person’s documents. Then you need to appeal that decision in court. Sometimes, if the court does not listen to your arguments, you need to be persistent and forceful in defending your client’s position.

Jacobsen: Which areas of Ukrainian law have changed the most since Russia’s full-scale invasion, whether in military, criminal, migration, or other fields?

Mazur: The first thing is the legal regime of martial law, because it affects many other areas of law.

Some rights and legal procedures operate differently during martial law. Certain constitutional rights can be temporarily restricted, but the Constitution itself has not been suspended, and Ukraine’s main constitutional institutions continue to function.

For example, security checks at borders and checkpoints can be more extensive during martial law. Authorities may check identity documents and, in legally defined circumstances, inspect belongings or vehicles.

There can also be greater restrictions on some rights than under ordinary conditions.

A simple example is a police stop while you are driving. Under Ukrainian law, the police can require you to present identification or other relevant documents in a way that allows the officer to read and record the information. During martial law and mobilization, police may also require men between 18 and 60 to present military-registration documents together with identification.

Normally, police must also have a lawful basis to stop a vehicle and must explain the specific reason for the stop.

During martial law, however, there are additional legal powers to check documents, inspect vehicles and belongings, and restrict movement in particular circumstances. These powers must still be exercised under the law.

So the balance between individual rights and state security measures has changed significantly since the full-scale invasion.

During martial law, government authorities can have broader powers to inspect a person’s car, belongings, documents, and, in certain legally defined circumstances, premises.

For example, an authorized official may say, “I would like to see what is inside your car. Could you please open the doors? Could you show me your bag?” They may want to check what is inside the vehicle and who is travelling with you.

Some ordinary legal procedures operate differently under martial law, but that does not mean the authorities can act without any legal basis.

The second field that has changed significantly is probably migration law, because so many Ukrainians have left the country. Many areas of law are now connected with migration.

Many Ukrainians are abroad, and the Ukrainian state has had to expand the role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, consulates, and embassies in providing services to citizens outside Ukraine.

Many legal issues now concern consular services abroad, including renewing Ukrainian passports and other documents, registering children born abroad, and confirming Ukrainian citizenship.

For example, Ukrainian diplomatic institutions abroad can issue or renew passports and provide other consular services. For Ukrainian men aged 18 to 60, some consular services during martial law also require a valid electronic military- registration document.

Another major area concerns Ukrainians from occupied territories and their property. That can involve property law, civil law, documentation, compensation, and other legal issues.

So almost every important field of law in Ukraine is now affected in some way by martial law. Martial law is not a separate issue sitting above everything else. It influences how many different areas of law operate.

Jacobsen: Within migration law, which wartime cases are the hardest to resolve, particularly when there is no straightforward legal or administrative solution?

Mazur: Removing entry bans is one of the most difficult areas, especially entry bans involving Ukraine or European countries.

It can also be difficult to calculate how many days a person has spent in Europe, determine their legal status, or change that status.

Another difficulty is encouraging foreign workers or investors to come to Ukraine. Some people want to invest money but do not want to stay and work here. But Ukraine needs people, because there are shortages in parts of the workforce.

Another difficult issue is preparing documents when the person is not physically present in Ukraine.

That often requires a power of attorney. It takes time because the person may need to find a notary abroad or visit a Ukrainian consulate.

Consular requirements can also create additional steps. For example, Ukrainian men between 18 and 60 seeking certain consular services abroad currently need a valid electronic military-registration document.

This is difficult because we need to find a way to sign a contract with someone abroad and prepare a power of attorney. Sometimes a person has an appointment the following week, and we have only three days to prepare the documents while also dealing with air-raid alerts.

A working day can be divided into several parts. One part is simply working around the alerts. The other is finding enough uninterrupted time to go somewhere, sometimes within only a few minutes, while also dealing with traffic caused by the alerts.

Another issue is proving to the Security Service of Ukraine that a foreign national is not connected with Russia in a way that creates a security concern.

Ukraine needs migrants and foreign workers, but bringing people into Ukraine can be complicated because of security screening. The Security Service may need to check them, and I understand why. I also don’t know everyone coming into the country. Sometimes I make a request and say, “Please check this person.”

People usually come to me when they already have a problem and need me to solve it. Once I know how to solve the problem, I no longer see it only as a problem. I see the solution.

But implementing that solution can still be difficult because the process takes money, time, and nerves.

Jacobsen: Thank you for your time and insights, Liza.