Buying train ticket more than just transaction in Ukraine, it's entering into public contract – attorney
Purchasing a train ticket is not merely a financial transaction – it constitutes the conclusion of a public contract, which obligates Ukrzaliznytsia (Ukrainian Railways) to provide services to anyone who seeks them.
According to Kyrylo Iordanov, senior attorney at the law firm Barristers, the right to freedom of movement cannot be restricted simply because a person cannot purchase a ticket through the Diia app. Any such restriction must be imposed by law – not by internal policies of Ukrzaliznytsia.
"Buying a train ticket isn't just a transaction. It's entering into a public contract. In simple terms, it's like going to a store for bread. The store can't refuse to sell it to you if you have the money. The same applies to Ukrzaliznytsia, which holds a monopoly in the country's rail transport sector – it is legally obligated to serve anyone who approaches it. This is clearly spelled out in Article 633 of Ukraine's Civil Code," he told Interfax-Ukraine.
Iordanov noted that by making Diia the sole access point for ticket purchases, the carrier is unilaterally changing the terms of service. It's not simply offering a convenient digital tool – it's forcing people to use it and creating an artificial barrier in the process.
"It creates a paradox: your passport – the main document verifying your identity – suddenly becomes less important than having an app on your phone. This isn't just an inconvenience – it's a direct violation of the principle of equality. Ukraine's Constitution guarantees everyone the right to freedom of movement. Yes, that right can be limited – but only by law, not by an internal policy decision of a joint-stock company (even if that company is state-owned)," he said.
Iordanov believes Ukrzaliznytsia's new policy requiring Diia verification to purchase tickets in practice constitutes a restriction of freedom of movement.
"Ukrzaliznytsia's initiative deals a blow to what is known as the 'digital divide,' putting large groups of people at a disadvantage. These are not scalpers. They are ordinary passengers who are now effectively being cut off from a basic public service by the state, acting through Ukrzaliznytsia," he said.
The attorney also pointed to the risks associated with a "non-alternative system reliant on complex coordination among multiple platforms – Ukrzaliznytsia, Diia, BankID, and mobile providers."
"Being critically dependent on a single infrastructure creates huge risks: in the event of a major DDoS attack on Diia servers or a technical failure in Ukrzaliznytsia's systems, ticket sales for key routes could be completely paralyzed. Without an alternative like ticket counters, thousands of people could be trapped in a critical situation. That makes the system inherently risky. Add to that the human factor: Diia is inseparably tied to a smartphone. If someone loses their phone, breaks it, or it simply runs out of battery, they lose their only means of accessing the service – turning a routine inconvenience into a serious problem," he explained.
In addition, Iordanov noted that the initiative creates invisible barriers for foreign visitors and Ukrainian citizens permanently residing abroad, as they are unable to use the system.
He also pointed to a "legal vacuum of liability" if a passenger incurs financial losses due to system failures.
"Current legislation doesn't provide a clear answer – it leaves the consumer alone with their problem and no effective tools for recovering losses. This combination of technical and operational risks shows that the hasty rollout of non-alternative digital solutions can trigger collapse where once there were just inconveniences," he said.
At the same time, Iordanov emphasized that legal challenges from passengers who are unable to purchase tickets due to these changes have strong prospects in court.
"The legal arguments are rock solid: violation of consumer rights, coercion into accepting discriminatory contract terms, and infringement of constitutional rights. A court would most likely side with the individual and order the carrier to remove the obstacles," he said.
Iordanov also believes that Ukrzaliznytsia's actions could provoke a harsh response from the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (AMCU), ranging from mandatory recommendations to change the rules to multimillion-hryvnia fines.
"Ukrzaliznytsia is a monopoly. And abuse of a monopolistic position falls squarely within the AMCU's jurisdiction. Creating a situation where one group of consumers (those with Diia) has access to a service, while another group (without Diia) does not, is a textbook example of such abuse," he said.
"When implementing any innovation in the social sphere, it's essential to stick to a key principle – inclusivity and the availability of choice. Diia.Pidpys can be an excellent verification tool – a convenient and modern option for many passengers. But keeping the possibility to purchase tickets the traditional way, such as in person at a ticket office with a passport, would help avoid creating barriers for different segments of the population," the attorney concluded.
As reported earlier, due to a shortage of train tickets, Ukrzaliznytsia began testing verification through Diia.Signature on July 25. The system was initially applied to international routes and five popular domestic trains. However, the move drew sharp criticism from a segment of passengers. In response, the company rolled back the requirement for two domestic train pairs — Nos. 105/106 Odesa–Kyiv and 91/92 Lviv–Kyiv – and left it in place on a test basis for three train pairs: Nos. 29/30 Kyiv–Uzhgorod, No. 12 Lviv–Odesa, and Nos. 27/28 Kyiv–Chop.