Epstein’s Dream in the Verkhovna Rada: Why Does Ukraine Need to Legalize Marriage with 14-Year-Olds?

A proposed Ukrainian bill allowing marriage from 14 sparks outrage, as critics warn it would legitimize sexual crimes, undermine child protection, and undermine European standards.

A debate has unfolded in Ukraine regarding a legislative initiative that would allow marriage from the age of 14 under certain conditions. This concerns a draft of the new Civil Code of Ukraine, proposed by the leadership of the Verkhovna Rada (Ruslan Stefanchuk, Olena Kondratiuk, Oleksandr Kornienko, Mykola Stefanchuk, and Ivan Kalaur). This provision would introduce, for the first time, the option of “marital capacity” for individuals at such a young age, raising concerns among legal experts and the public. This was reported by Vladyslav Smirnov on his Facebook page.

The reason? Pregnancy or the birth of a child. The authors’ logic is as simple as a door: if a child becomes pregnant — let’s make her a wife. The logic of reality is even scarier: the state is proposing a mechanism to legalize pedophilia and to whitewash criminal offenses through civil registry offices. Let’s take a closer look at the content of the initiative, the current legislation, and the possible consequences of its implementation.

Legal schizophrenia: when a crime becomes a “family matter”

Let’s put aside the rhetoric and look at the Criminal Code. In Ukraine, the age of sexual consent is 16. This is a red line. Any sexual activity with a person under 16 is a crime (Article 155 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). It’s an axiom: a 14-year-old girl cannot give legally valid consent to sex. Period.

Now, follow the legislators’ logic. If a 14-year-old girl is found to be pregnant, it means one thing: a sexual act occurred with a person who has not reached sexual maturity. In other words, a crime has taken place. In a normal country, this would trigger the work of investigators, prosecutors, and psychologists. Who is the father? If it’s an adult man, he should go to prison. But the new bill proposes a different path: he doesn’t go to prison — he goes to the wedding.

We are being offered a sleight of hand: to use the consequence of a crime (pregnancy) as grounds for its legalization (marriage). This is not about protecting the mother’s interests. It is about creating a perfect loophole for a rapist. Because once a pedophile obtains a marriage certificate, he turns into a “lawful husband,” and the criminal case collapses under the pressure of so-called “family values.”

Epstein files, Ukrainian edition

For me, as for many others, reading this initiative evokes a strong association with the “Epstein files.” Same vibes: influential adults looking for a way to exploit children with impunity, hiding behind high society.

Jeffrey Epstein built his empire on the idea that rules exist for the masses, while there are exceptions for the “chosen.” The Ukrainian provision on “marriage at 14” is exactly the creation of such a systemic exception. It is a state-engineered mechanism: how to turn a defendant into a son-in-law. It’s a green light for any “sugar daddy” from the provinces: made a schoolgirl pregnant — don’t fear the prosecutor, just buy the rings and make a deal with her parents. This is not demographic policy; it is the institutionalization of corruption and sexual exploitation.

Geography of “traditions”: The club of dictatorships and Islamic fundamentalists

When we are told about “international experience,” the authors of the bill conveniently remain silent about whose experience it actually is. Because if you look at a world map, it turns out that Ukraine is being pulled not toward the European Union, but into a very specific company.

The civilized world closes these loopholes rather than opening them. Europe: the trend is clear — “No Exceptions.” Germany: marriages under 16 are legally void, and those between 16 and 18 can be annulled by the court. Colombia: a country we usually consider problematic, in 2024, after the campaign “They are girls, not wives,” completely banned marriage under 18, closing the 14-year-old loophole. Dominican Republic and Honduras: recently abolished all exceptions, banning child marriage. Latin America understood this: allowing early marriage is allowing pedophilia.

Now let’s look at who our new “legal allies” are, where the logic “marriage at 14 if the court allows” applies:

Bangladesh: In 2017, they adopted a provision allowing marriage under 18 in “special cases” (pregnancy) with court approval. Human Rights Watch called this the legalization of violence. Congratulations, Ukrainian reformers copied the provision word for word from Bangladeshi Islamists.

Equatorial Guinea: A strict African dictatorship. The Civil Code allows marriage from 14 with parental consent. Living standards and human rights there are accordingly poor.

Iran: Article 1041 of their code allows girls to be married even before the age of 13, with “guardian consent and court approval.” Court approval for sex with a child is a norm of Sharia law, not of the Copenhagen criteria.

Niger and Sudan: Countries where the concept of “marriageable age” is tied to sexual maturity, and pregnancy automatically turns a child into a “woman.”

And, of course, the marginal communities: what we politically correctly call “Romani traditions” (or, in popular terms, “like the Gypsies”), where girls are married off in their teenage years. But there’s a key difference: in Europe, this practice is fought as a form of barbarism that destroys lives, deprives children of education and health. Juvenile justice and the police intervene. Ukrainian legislators, however, decided to codify this barbarism into the Code.

Instead of raising our legal culture to Berlin’s standards, we are lowering the bar to the level of legislation in Bangladesh and Iran. This is not a “special Ukrainian path.” It is a path to the Third World, paved with perverse intentions to protect the consequences of someone’s criminal act.

Biopolitics or state cynicism?

Some defenders of the initiative quietly hint at demographics. They say: there is a war, there are too few of us, we need to give birth. This is probably the most repulsive aspect of all. If a state places its hopes for national survival on the wombs of 14-year-old children, that state is sick. Romanticizing teenage pregnancy amid war, poverty, and stress is a crime. It is medically proven that a 14-year-old body is not ready to carry a pregnancy. The psyche is not ready for motherhood. Pushing children into adult life through a civil registry office is not a solution to the demographic crisis. It is the creation of a class of uneducated, traumatized young mothers who trade school for diapers, while their “lawful husbands” (often much older) avoid prison.

Conclusions

Bill No. 14394, in this part, must be castrated. Pregnancy at the age of 14 is grounds for criminal prosecution, not for a wedding. The state must guarantee such a child protection, medical care, social benefits, child support from the father (even if he ends up in prison), and the opportunity to continue her education. But it has no right to issue her a marriage certificate, thereby legalizing what throughout the civilized world is called statutory rape.

And if someone now wants to object by saying, “you are destabilizing things,” “you are exaggerating,” “these are isolated cases,” my answer is the simplest one: laws are not written for isolated cases. Laws are written for systems.

If we want to be part of Europe, we raise the age of consent and protection. If we want to build a branch of “Epstein Island” with elements of Equatorial Guinea’s customary law — then, of course, go ahead and vote. But don’t be surprised later when the world looks at us as barbarians.