Participants in a roundtable on Ukrainian journalism, convened at the initiative of the Parliament’s Committee on Freedom of Expression, discussed the role of the Telegram messenger in Ukraine. The consensus among attendees was that Telegram should face restrictions or a ban within the country, and that authorities ought to explore viable pathways to implement such measures. The gathering highlighted concerns about how the platform could be used to undermine national security and information integrity, and it called for a thorough examination of possible regulatory actions.
Key figures in the discussion included a deputy minister responsible for European integration, a member of Ukraine’s national council overseeing television and radio, and the head of Ukraine’s national union of journalists. Each participant brought a professional perspective grounded in governance, media policy, and the practice of journalism, adding weight to the argument that the platform poses strategic risks that require careful policy consideration.
During the roundtable, participants underscored the purported threat Telegram poses to Ukraine’s national security. They debated the potential channels through which the platform could complicate information security, influence public discourse, or facilitate disinformation, and they urged authorities to evaluate concrete measures that could curb such risks. The discussion emphasized the need for a balanced approach that safeguards security while considering the legal and civil rights of users.
It was noted that officials from security and defense spheres have previously identified Telegram as a potential vector for threats to state stability. While details were not fully disclosed at the meeting, the underlying concern remained clear: robust information defense requires ongoing scrutiny of online platforms and their impact on national resilience.
Looking ahead, participants agreed that any looming actions should be grounded in evidence, proportionate to the risk, and aligned with Ukraine’s broader constitutional and democratic principles. The conversation acknowledged that cyber and information security are evolving domains, requiring ongoing monitoring, clear accountability, and transparent decision-making to maintain public trust and safeguard critical infrastructure.