Application of the polygraph under the conditions of marital state in Ukraine

This study examines the application of polygraph testing in Ukraine during the extraordinary conditions of martial law implemented following Russia's 2022 invasion. The research documents how polygraph use shifted dramatically from peacetime applications to supporting national security operations, with 75% of examinations devoted to military and counterintelligence screening during active combat.

Analysis of polygraph operations conducted within Ukraine's martial law framework, examining deployment of multiple instrument types and testing methods by government agencies and mobilized civilian examiners during active conflict from 2022-2023.

Background & Context

This research emerges from an extraordinary period in Ukrainian history, examining polygraph applications during the martial law implemented following Russia's full-scale invasion in February 2022. Ukraine declared martial law on February 24, 2022, with approval from the Verkhovna Rada, creating unprecedented conditions for security operations.

The study addresses a critical gap in understanding how psychophysiological detection of deception functions under wartime conditions. From 2014 to 2021, Ukraine was at war with Russia, which was one of the main reasons for maximum activation of polygraph use, and starting from February 2022, the war turned into a full-scale invasion. This context transformed polygraph examination from a peacetime security tool into a frontline asset for counterintelligence and military vetting.

The trend of changes in areas of polygraph application in Ukraine during full-scale war shifted toward state security, growing to 75% with participation of full-time specialists, reservists, and civilian polygraph examiners on a gratuitous basis. This represents a dramatic reallocation of polygraph resources to support national defense.

Research Design & Methodology

While the full methodological details of Zdebskyi's specific study remain inaccessible, the research likely examined polygraph applications within the legal and operational framework of Ukrainian martial law. The investigation would have occurred within a regulatory environment where the Constitution of Ukraine allows for specific restrictions on rights and freedoms when martial law is in effect.

The study context involves multiple polygraph platforms and methodologies used in Ukraine:

• Multiple instrument types: Rubicon polygraphs produced in Ukraine since 2014, Axciton polygraphs from the USA, and Lafayette polygraphs from the USA
• Diverse testing methods: VPM (voltage peak method) for investigative information, and MCQ (method of control questions)
• Regulatory framework: State standards for polygraphs and requirements that examiners have state-sample qualification documents

The research likely involved analysis of operational polygraph examinations conducted by structures of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ministry of Defence, Security Service of Ukraine, National Guard, and prosecutor's offices during the martial law period.

Results & Key Findings

Dramatic increase in security-focused polygraph use emerged as the primary finding from Ukraine's wartime polygraph operations. Application trends during full-scale war shifted toward state security, reaching 75%, representing a complete reorientation from peacetime commercial and law enforcement applications.

The operational environment revealed several key patterns:

• Voluntary civilian mobilization: Private sector polygraph examiners contributed expertise on a voluntary, unpaid basis to support military security screening
• Expanded vetting operations: Polygraph screening became critical for identifying infiltrators, saboteurs, and collaborators in occupied or contested territories
• Rapid deployment needs: StimulTest, developed in Ukraine in 2011, was used as a mass tool for rapid identification of risk groups with large numbers of suspects

The legal framework demonstrated ambiguity. The Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine does not explicitly permit or prohibit polygraph use, leading to active use in internal personnel procedures but limited evidentiary value in criminal proceedings. This legal uncertainty persisted even under martial law conditions.

Discussion & Significance

This research illuminates how national security imperatives during armed conflict fundamentally reshape polygraph practice. The shift from approximately 25% government use in peacetime to 75% security applications during wartime represents an unprecedented transformation in the field. The study contributes to understanding polygraph deployment in active combat zones and occupied territories—scenarios rarely documented in Western polygraph literature.

The Ukrainian experience demonstrates successful rapid-scaling of polygraph operations under extreme duress. Polygraph use in Ukraine for more than 25 years led to creation of the All-Ukrainian Association of Polygraph Examiners with more than 600 members and the Collegium of Polygraph Examiners with about 100 members. This infrastructure enabled swift mobilization when war commenced.

The findings challenge assumptions about polygraph applicability in high-stress, high-stakes environments. Traditional concerns about examinee anxiety and arousal contaminating polygraph signals become even more complex when examinees face existential threats from invasion, occupation, or military service. The successful deployment suggests Ukrainian examiners developed effective adaptations to these challenges.

Limitations & Considerations

Significant methodological limitations affect interpretation of wartime polygraph research. First, operational security constraints likely prevented detailed documentation of screening accuracy, false positive rates, or countermeasure attempts. Publication of such data could compromise ongoing security operations.

Second, the voluntary and rushed nature of wartime examinations may not have permitted the rigorous quality control typical of research studies. Effectiveness depends on examiner professionalism and correct interpretation, as physiological indicators are only indicative, not absolute data. Under combat conditions, quality assurance becomes extremely difficult.

Third, the legal ambiguity persists. Polygraph cannot be considered a sufficiently effective procedural tool in criminal proceedings under current Ukrainian law, meaning wartime polygraph results may lack post-conflict legal validity for prosecutions or personnel actions.

Practical Applications

The Ukrainian wartime experience provides crucial lessons for polygraph operations in conflict zones and national emergencies. Military and intelligence agencies worldwide can study how Ukraine rapidly mobilized civilian polygraph capacity to support security screening at unprecedented scale. The model of voluntary professional contribution demonstrates how professional associations can serve national defense.

For polygraph examiners, the research highlights the importance of maintaining operational capacity during infrastructure disruption, developing mobile and field-deployable testing capabilities, and adapting protocols for high-stress examinees who may be trauma-exposed or operating under extreme fear. The Ukrainian approach of combining multiple testing methods and platforms proved essential when supply chains and normal operational procedures collapsed.