Ukrainian service members seeking to return after an unauthorized absence can still resume military service after September 20, 2026, but the accelerated route is no longer available. The standard procedure is more formal, can take longer and does not generally allow an individual to choose freely where to serve next.

Ukraine’s Ministry of Defence reported the details on Monday, September 21. The clarification concerns the period following the closure of a special programme that had applied through September 20 to absences recorded before June 12, 2026.

The end of the programme does not amount to an amnesty deadline after which returning becomes impossible. Rather, it changes the administrative path. A service member must now re-enter the military system through the Military Law and Order Service, commonly referred to by its Ukrainian abbreviation VSP, or report to an appropriate reserve battalion.

The distinction matters because an unauthorized absence may trigger several parallel processes. Military authorities must establish the person’s status and future assignment, while investigators may be dealing with a suspected criminal offence. Returning voluntarily is an important legal fact, but it does not by itself erase an investigation or automatically restore all pay and benefits.

A returning service member may approach the central VSP directorate in Kyiv and the Kyiv region, a territorial directorate or a zonal department. Officers there are expected to explain which reserve battalions are accepting personnel and may issue formal directions to one of them. Contact details should be checked before travel because territorial responsibility and reception arrangements can vary.

It is also possible to arrive directly at a reserve battalion. In practice, confirming the correct unit with the VSP first can prevent delays, particularly where a person’s documents are incomplete or the circumstances of the absence have already been entered into law-enforcement databases.

Once the service member reaches a reserve battalion, its commander has up to three days to issue an order placing the individual on the list of temporarily arrived personnel and assigning duties. This creates an official record of the person’s return to military control, although it is not necessarily the final personnel decision or a transfer to the unit the individual prefers.

The reserve battalion commander then checks through law-enforcement bodies whether information about the absence has been entered into the Unified Register of Pre-Trial Investigations. If an entry exists, the criminal-law aspect proceeds separately. Investigators and prosecutors prepare the relevant materials, while a court retains the authority to decide whether the statutory grounds for release from criminal liability are met.

The battalion must also notify the unit from which the service member departed. If the individual holds written consent from the commander of a combat unit designated for priority staffing, that unit can be identified in the notice. This may shape the next assignment, but operational staffing needs and formal personnel procedures remain decisive.

Recommendation letters are treated differently depending on their origin. Reserve battalion commanders may consider letters from combat brigades that require reinforcements. Letters issued by support units, however, are not taken into account under the described procedure, and the service member may instead be directed to a priority-staffing formation.

This restriction marks one of the clearest differences from the streamlined arrangement. A volunteer return no longer carries the same opportunity to select a destination, and a recommendation should not be confused with an enforceable right to transfer. Health, military specialty, rank, available posts and the Armed Forces’ manpower priorities can all affect the outcome.

Financial restoration may also be slower. Pay does not necessarily resume the moment a person walks into a VSP office or reserve battalion; the authorities must issue orders, clarify personnel records and exchange documents with the former and receiving units. Keeping copies of directions, reports and registration documents can therefore be important if later questions arise about dates or entitlements.

Ukrainian law provides a possible route out of criminal liability for a person who committed the relevant offence for the first time during martial law. Under Part 5 of Article 401 of the Criminal Code, the service member must demonstrate an intention to continue serving and obtain written consent from a commander. The availability of this mechanism depends on the facts of the individual case and should not be understood as automatic immunity.

To seek that outcome, the service member submits a military report, secures the commander’s written agreement to continued service and petitions an investigator, prosecutor or court. The case materials are then sent to a court, which makes the final ruling. Neither a commander nor a reserve battalion can unilaterally terminate criminal liability.

The post-September 20 framework therefore combines an open door to voluntary return with tighter administrative control. It offers a path back into service and, for eligible first-time offenders, a potential legal resolution, but the process may involve waiting, limited choice of unit and judicial review. Individual legal advice may be particularly valuable where the absence is disputed, repeated, linked to medical circumstances or already the subject of active proceedings.