Lie detector for teachers: can a teacher be forced to take a polygraph?

At the end of August the Odesa outlet Dumskaya reported on a case from the village of Labushne in Podilsk district. A pensioner quarrelled with a teacher, ended up in court for petty hooliganism – and demanded that the teacher and all the witnesses be tested on a lie detector. No test took place, and the case ended with a fine of 119 hryvnias.

The story is a small one, but the question behind it is serious: can anyone in Ukraine force a teacher or a civil servant to take a polygraph?

What happened in Labushne

According to Dumskaya, in April the man came to the school to collect his grandson, a third-year pupil. He wanted to find out from the class teacher why the boy’s father – a veteran who has been listed as missing in action at the front since October 2025 – had not been included in the list of parents who are combat veterans. The conversation turned into shouting: the man slammed the door and threatened the teachers with the prosecutor’s office.

An administrative offence report was drawn up against him. He did not admit guilt, claimed that the police had fabricated the case, and demanded the recusal of the judge and a polygraph test for the teacher and the witnesses. The case dragged on for two months and seven hearings. Kodyma District Court found him guilty under Article 173 of the Code of Administrative Offences and imposed a fine of 119 hryvnias. That is the upper limit: Article 173 provides for a fine of 3 to 7 non-taxable minimum incomes, that is, from 51 to 119 hryvnias.

Why the court did not send the teacher for a polygraph

Because it could not. The Code of Administrative Offences does not mention the polygraph at all. A witness is obliged to appear and tell the truth, but is not obliged to undergo a psychophysiological examination. In Ukraine such an examination is possible only with the person’s voluntary written consent – this follows from Article 28 of the Constitution, which prohibits any experiments on a person without their free consent.

There is a second reason too. A polygraph examiner’s report is not, in itself, evidence in court. For the courts there is a separate procedure – a forensic psychophysiological examination – and even ordering one is the court’s right, not its duty. So the demand to “test them all on the detector” sounds impressive but has no legal force.

Teachers and civil servants: where the polygraph is in the law and where it is not

Ukraine has no separate law on the polygraph. There are several laws that expressly provide for such testing in particular services: the State Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Economic Security, the National Police (for candidates), the customs service, the State Protection Department, and also for employees of certain law enforcement bodies who have access to state secrets. Even there the person’s consent is required in most cases; the difference is that a refusal can close the door to the post. Each body is covered in detail in the article on polygraph legislation.

Schools are not on that list. The word “polygraph” does not appear in the laws “On Education” and “On Complete General Secondary Education“. Nor does it appear in the general law “On Civil Service“: an ordinary competition for a civil service post does not involve such a test.

So for a teacher, and for most civil servants, the same rule applies as for an employee of a private company:

• a test is possible only with voluntary written consent;
• neither the head teacher, nor the education department, nor the village council, nor the parents’ committee can demand it;
• a refusal is not grounds for dismissal or a reprimand: the list of grounds in the Labour Code is exhaustive, and refusing a polygraph is not on it.

What this means for you

If you are a teacher or a civil servant. You can be offered a test, but you cannot be obliged to take one. You may refuse without giving reasons, and that is not an admission of guilt. If you decide to agree, insist on written consent, on a list of questions agreed in advance, and on the result going only to the people you name yourself. I have described how the procedure works in the article on polygraph testing.

If you are a head teacher. An order that “everyone must take a polygraph” is unlawful. In a conflict your tools are different: an internal investigation, written explanations from the employee (you are obliged to request these before any disciplinary sanction – Article 149 of the Labour Code), statements from colleagues and from children in the presence of their parents, and camera footage if there is any. For an immoral act by an employee who performs educational functions the law allows dismissal – but on the basis of established facts, not a test result.

If you are a parent. You cannot demand a polygraph from a teacher. There are other things you can do.

What parents can actually do

1. Write a statement addressed to the head teacher describing what happened: the date, the place, who saw it. A spoken complaint in the corridor sets nothing in motion; a written one does.
2. If it concerns bullying or humiliation of a child, demand that the school’s anti-bullying commission consider the matter.
3. If the school does not respond, contact the community’s education department, the State Service of Education Quality or the Education Ombudsman.
4. If there are signs of a crime (beating, harassment, extortion of money), go straight to the police. There the inquiry will be carried out by investigators, and it is they who will decide whether a forensic examination is needed.

A polygraph can enter a story like this in only one way: the person themselves wants to confirm what they have said. For example, a teacher who has been accused without grounds. It is a voluntary step, and its result is an argument in a conversation with the school management, not a verdict.

Children under 12 are not tested at all, and those aged 12 to 18 only with their parents’ written consent. So “testing the child to see whether they are making it up” is not a solution for the younger years either.

A practitioner’s comment

The worst test is the one a person has been brought to under pressure. Formally the consent is signed, but in reality the person is frightened and resentful, and working with them is difficult. When people come to me because of a conflict at work, I first find out whether the person really is coming of their own accord.

No method gives 100%. The classic polygraph has an accuracy of 85–89% according to the American Polygraph Association’s meta-analysis (2011). So the result should be considered alongside other facts, not instead of them. I conduct tests in person in Lviv; the cost is on the prices page. This text is not legal advice: in an employment dispute, consult a lawyer.

FAQ

Can a teacher be dismissed for refusing a polygraph?

No. The Labour Code contains no such ground, and the list of grounds for dismissal at the employer’s initiative is exhaustive. Refusing is a right, not a breach of discipline.

Can a compulsory polygraph be written into a school’s charter or a collective agreement?

It can be written in, but that will not create an obligation: terms that worsen an employee’s position compared with the law are invalid. Consent must be voluntary every time, and the person can withdraw it.

Will a polygraph result help in court?

Not on its own. A court can take into account only the conclusion of a forensic psychophysiological examination, and even then only together with other evidence. In the Labushne case the court did without a polygraph altogether.