International standards for safeguarding and ensuring human rights are based on the presumption of a shared understanding of the value of the rule of law and the potential application, in the event of a conflict of interests, of a regulated procedure for resolving imbalances. A particular challenge arises during armed conflict, when matters of national security take precedence. As historical experience shows, during war, the enemy side employs methods to undermine statehood, intimidate the population, and create the impression that law enforcement agencies are incapable of taking measures to prevent and combat crime, conducting effective investigations, or ensuring that courts deliver just verdicts. To this end, they resort to terrorist threats and other actions, with the aim of seriously destabilising or destroying the country’s fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures. According to the Office of the Attorney General, 608,101 criminal offences were recorded in 2025, of which 154,093 were particularly serious crimes and 304,667 were serious crimes. Under martial law, crimes against the foundations of Ukraine’s national security (5,404), crimes against public safety (8,989) and others pose a particular threat. In Ukraine in 2025, 1,070 cases of treason (Article 111 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine) and 1,714 cases of collaboration were detected, and 160 criminal offences were recorded under Article 258 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (“Terrorist Act”), etc. At the same time, the number of criminal proceedings in which cases have been referred to court is significantly lower (of 608,101 proceedings, 139,707 were referred to court with an indictment), which indicates certain procedural obstacles in the collection of evidence. The legislature has introduced amendments to procedural legislation that take into account the specific features of pre-trial investigations under martial law; however, the duration of hostilities has created additional risks and challenges, including in the rear, through the detonation of explosives during the transport of postal items, the use of Ukrainians’ SIM cards for intelligence purposes, and so on. Martial law and other states of emergency, based on the experience of other states, provide grounds for the legislator to introduce mechanisms for ensuring state security that are proportionate to the threats.