Paid dog registration in Kyiv violates the Constitution — journalist

Kyiv has once again introduced mandatory paid registration of dogs — this time at the Central Animal Welfare Centers, at 210 hryvnias for each animal. The authorities present this as a step towards order, but journalist Vladyslav Bovsunovskyi sees something else in the innovation — legal arbitrariness and a scheme that has no legal basis. In his column, he explains why this fee violates the Constitution, the laws of Ukraine, and common sense, and also calls on pet owners not to remain silent, but to demand answers.

In the context of the Unified Marathon or whatever it's called, all media outlets, without exception, legitimized a corruption scheme, invented back in the days of Lenny Kosmos, about registering pets. Journalists, pathetically blowing up the news, forgot about a small detail - registration is paid, in fact an illegally imposed levy.

As a dog owner with a lot of experience, I have been sending all these KP since the early 2000s, when this “registration” was just introduced — then aunties with the voices of alcoholics called apartment to apartment and demanded 34 UAH. Now appetites have increased — everyone has to lose weight… 210 UAH each.

What is legal and what is not?

Let's start with the basics.

The Law of Ukraine "On the Protection of Animals from Cruelty" defines the principles of humane treatment of animals and establishes the obligations of owners, in particular, regarding the identification of the animal.

But the law itself does not contain any direct requirement to register a dog in a specific place, through a specific structure, and even more so for a fee. The law guarantees the protection of the animal, and does not create barriers to fulfilling obligations to it.

Ukraine is governed by the rule of law. This means that no by-law (rules, instructions, city council decisions) may go beyond the law or contradict it. This is enshrined in the Constitution (Articles 19 and 92).

Now let's look at responsibility:

The Code of Administrative Offenses (Article 154) refers to a fine for “violation of the rules for keeping animals,” including keeping unregistered dogs.

But:

  • it is not stated that registration must be done specifically at the ASC;
  • it is not said that it must be paid;
  • and it is not specifically stated that without payment to the KP, the dog is automatically considered “unregistered.”.

So, we have the situation:

Local authorities establish mandatory paid registration of dogs through a specific CP, effectively creating a monopoly.

Owners are fined not for breaking the law, but for failing to comply with the provisions of a local decision that does not have the force of law.

This is an abuse of authority and a violation of the right of citizens to free access to administrative services (Article 11 of the Law of Ukraine “On Administrative Services”).

I am for order and animal registration. However, I am against legal arbitrariness.

Request clarification:

  • Based on which law should paid registration take place?
  • Why is my animal automatically declared “outlaw” without payment?
  • and most importantly, who has the right to decide this?

The law is the law. And only the law. Everything else is just an addition that cannot replace the main thing.

For reference: In Ukraine, there are services for free online registration of animals based on the presence of a chip, veterinary passport, and vaccination.

 

spot_imgspot_imgspot_imgspot_img

Popular

Share this post:

More like this
HERE

Billions of dollars in funding for occupied communities: the basis for future recovery or a question of efficiency

The budgets of temporarily occupied communities remain an important element of state policy...

Prosecutor involved in Tetyana Krupa scandal retains disability

The Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Prosecutors has decided to close the disciplinary proceedings...

Declaration worth millions: what does the family of an employee of the Western Office of the State Administrative Service of Ukraine have?

Former State Audit Service official Oksana Bersheda returns to her position after being dismissed...

A person involved in criminal cases may receive a new term for desertion

On February 26, 2026, law enforcement officers detained Vitaliy Dychka, a well-known...

Investigation into airfield shelters receives new evidence

In the case of the alleged receipt of a bribe of $320,000...

Was ex-prosecutor Filchakov in Kharkiv at the beginning of the Russian invasion - what is known?

On the anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on the YouTube channel...

Over 50% of Ukrainian women reported sexual harassment and discrimination in Europe

Ukrainian women who left abroad after the start of full-scale...

An investigator from the Zhytomyr region police purchased an apartment in the Kyiv region for over 3 million UAH

Investigator Oleksandra Poruzinska from the Main Directorate of the National Police in...