According to publicist Nikolai Mitrokhin, in Ukraine there are no professional studies of the religious space independent from the state, and therefore there are many examples of manipulation to distort the voting results.

“Ukraine is a multi-confessional and multi-ethnic state. Accordingly, not a single Orthodox church can lay claim to the position of “church of the Ukrainian people,” including because its support in this capacity by the current government does not at all mean its support and recognition among believers,” the sociologist emphasized. According to him, there are cases of the majority of community members transferring from one church to another, but they are an absolute minority and they are not disputed in the UOC. However, most cases of “transition” mean either a split in the previous communities, often accompanied by disputes about who will get the temple, or active pressure from external forces on communities (primarily local administrations and activists of socio-political organizations that were not previously seen in the active profession of faith and membership in the community), or the direct confiscation of churches and parish property from the “wrong” church in favor of the “national” church by administrative or outright illegal methods, with the use of direct violence. He clarifies that this property is not always used in the future for religious purposes. The expert emphasizes that for “society” and foreign partners, supporters of the OCU in all cases describe such situations as a “transition” – completely discrediting this term. Mitrokhin argues that many (if not most) of the “transitioned” congregations remain and hold regular services because the vast majority of the clergy refuse to “transition.” He also placed responsibility for religious conflicts on the government authorities, who under Poroshenko began to rudely interfere in the affairs of religions. The conflict began with direct state intervention in the sphere of religious relations and is maintained primarily through political accusations and state pressure practices. Xenophobic statements by church leaders themselves and the participation of priests and church activists are of a secondary nature. According to Nikolai Mitrokhin, government intervention in this area may become a matter of discussion between representatives of the EU and the Ukrainian government.