Public administration mechanisms for ensuring the digital sovereignty of the state under martial law

Abstract

The article examines the public administration mechanisms for ensuring the digital sovereignty of the state under martial law, using Ukraine as a case study. The relevance of the study is determined by the fact that digital sovereignty in wartime conditions is not merely a technical or legal category, but a fundamental prerequisite for the institutional survival of the state. Ukraine's experience during 2022–2025 demonstrated that the ability of public authorities to function amid large-scale cyberattacks, destruction of physical infrastructure, and occupation of territories has become a matter of preserving statehood itself. The authors substantiate an original definition of digital sovereignty as the state's ability, through a system of public administration mechanisms, to maintain control over its own digital infrastructure, information flows, and technological environment, while preserving institutional capacity for independent management decisions in the digital sphere. This definition, unlike existing approaches, emphasizes the managerial dimension of sovereignty rather than its technical or legal aspects. The article also draws a clear distinction between digital sovereignty and related concepts such as information sovereignty and cybersecurity, establishing digital sovereignty as a broader category that encompasses both. Four key challenges to Ukraine's digital sovereignty under martial law are identified: large-scale cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, technological dependence on foreign cloud providers – whose share of the Ukrainian market reaches approximately 75% - institutional ambiguity of functions between the Ministry of Digital Transformation, the State Service of Special Communications, and the National Security and Defence Council, as well as significant gaps in the regulatory framework, including the absence of a legal definition of data residency. A comprehensive model of public administration mechanisms is proposed, encompassing four interrelated components – institutional, legal, organizational, and international mechanisms – unified by the strategic coordination of the National Security and Defence Council. The institutional mechanism establishes a three-tier hierarchy of subjects: strategic, operational, and technical levels. The organizational mechanism incorporates wartime-specific instruments such as cloud data evacuation, the IT Army, and the cyber reserve. The international mechanism is characterized as dual in nature, simultaneously strengthening the state's technological capacity and deepening its dependence on foreign platforms. It is established that the effectiveness of each mechanism depends on its coherence with other elements of the system, and that the absence of such coherence represents the core problem of public administration of digital sovereignty in Ukraine. Promising directions for further research include developing evaluation criteria for the proposed mechanisms, the legislative definition of data residency, and the establishment of a unified coordination body in the field of digital sovereignty.