Is immunity needed for Ukrainian agents in the occupied territories – Rezazade

For over a year, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine has not considered draft law No. 11228-1, which could radically change the legal status of Ukrainian agents performing tasks in the temporarily occupied territories.

The document proposes to expand the list of circumstances under which a person’s actions are not considered a crime if they are carried out within the framework of special intelligence or counterintelligence tasks.

We are talking about those who, risking their lives, infiltrate the occupation administrations, structures of pseudo-republics, or even their law enforcement agencies in order to obtain critically important information for Ukrainian special services. Currently, such people, from a formal point of view, can be accused of treason or collaborationism, even if they acted exclusively in the interests of Ukraine.

International expert, first vice president of the Iranian opposition in Washington Ali Reza Rezazade emphasizes that the issue of legal immunity for agents in the occupation zone is not only a question of jurisprudence, but also a question of the survival of the state in conditions of war.

“In conditions of Russian aggression against Ukraine, the agent network is the eyes and ears of the state. If such people remain outside the law, then the state is actually punishing its heroes,” Rezazade notes.

At the same time, the expert warns against uncontrolled application of the norm.

“Immunity for agents cannot be a “white ticket”. All operations must be authorized in advance, have clear documentary confirmation and control. Otherwise, there will be a danger of creating a “shadow field” where criminals can operate under the cover of intelligence,” he emphasizes.

Rezazade also draws attention to international experience. Similar mechanisms exist in the USA, France, and Germany, but in all cases with strict restrictions.

“In France, agents have immunity only during the execution of a mission and only within the framework of an authorized operation. In Germany, only when an “illegal act” is the only way to prevent a threat to national security. This is not permissiveness, but a controlled exception,” the expert explains.

From Rezazade’s point of view, the Ukrainian bill offers a balanced approach — it does not abolish responsibility, but establishes clear “rules of the game.”

“The key is transparency. The decision to exempt from responsibility is made only by the court on the basis of a prosecutor’s request. This is a guarantee that special operations will not turn into abuse,” he adds.

The expert believes that the adoption of the bill will be a logical step for a state that seeks integration into NATO and the EU.

“Ukraine should have the same protection tools as countries that have been fighting terrorism and espionage for decades. But at the same time, to preserve humanity and legal control,” Rezazade concludes.

Thus, document No. 11228-1 can become a critically important element of the national security system, which will simultaneously ensure the protection of agents and maintain a balance between state expediency and the rule of law.