“NABU Director Semen Krivonos reported massive origins from the court registers. According to him, in the last few years one judge has made 1 million 174 thousand requests in the register, and such queries are no exception. The origins from the Unified State Register of Judgments at the stage of pre -trial investigation were not only in the case of the activity of the lawyer “Guarantee of Your Rights””, – WRITE ON: ua.news
NABU Director Semen Krivonos reported massive origins from the court registers. According to him, in the last few years one judge has made 1 million 174 thousand requests in the register, and such queries are no exception.
The origins from the Unified State Register of Judgments at the stage of pre -trial investigation were not only in the case of the activity of the law firm “Guarantee of your rights” under the guidance of Dmitry Borzikh, but also in other cases, Krivonos told in an interview with Zn.ua.
They apply not only to the competence of the National Anti -Corruption Bureau of Investigation.
The history of different persons illegally access to court decisions goes beyond the investigation of a particular case, and NABU was able to establish other facts of compromising the keys of different judges, officials and law enforcement officers who used the register, explained the Director of NABU.
He noted that earlier the EDSR could be entered with the help of only login and password, and only recently the so -called “solid key” (flash drive) became required for authentication. Therefore, it is not easy to prove the fact that the judge has passed the password to outsiders.
“For example, one of the judges has made 1 million 174 thousand requests in the EDSRSR in the last few years. And we found out that such queries are no exception. And this is a catastrophe. … There is already a “solid” key, and this is a good prevention, ”he said.
Krivonos stressed that the issue of leakage of data on investigative actions concerns not only anti -corruption bodies, but the director of the Bureau initiated a meeting among law enforcement officers to show the scale of the problem.
“This is a serious risk. The problem is much larger and requires the involvement of the entire law enforcement system. Lawyers are not the only ones who dumped information from the registers. We just managed to document them. And they were probably the most prominent because they created a bot and fully automated the process. They were mostly interested in our cases related to firework. For the other, this is a long -standing problem. Some lawyer companies that can be used for money from the Register have long and shot in the country’s law enforcement market, ”Krivonos said.
When checking a small number of users of the detective registry found 1.084 million requests from a certain account, 1.072 million, 557 thousand. To establish a violation, detectives simply compared requests with IP addresses through which users were included in the system.
“That is, if we talk about one judge who made more than a million requests, the question arises: why did he enter the register of 5830 different IPs?”, Krivonos explained.
NABU is still compared to NABU, but after preparing the array of information, the data will be transferred to the cyber police.
Investigators who are searched usually understand whether the involvement was warned about investigative actions, the NABU was repeatedly recorded, the official explained.
“It is necessary to respond urgently and close this hole through which the information can be drawn to the persons,” Krivonos said, adding that the human factor of data leakage from a law enforcement agencies will no longer be so large -scale.
In order to protect the system from such “technological leaks”, it is necessary to use legislators, because even a year ago in the first reading the draft law Denis Maslov, which allows to close access to the EDSRSR, contains rules that are not approved by human rights activists and NGOs. Some of its norms could be useful for pre -trial investigations.
In some cases, investigative actions should not be submitted to the EDRSU for at least five years, because the publication of a plot of a court decision even in a few years gives a lot of information to the people who have been drowned, Krivonos explained.
In general, NABU offers several options for solving the problem. One of them is the decision of the investigator or the prosecutor to classify a specific court decision for a certain time, which will close the technical possibility of illegal access to the search.
NABU is currently studying the consequences of the Borzi Office for each specific case for which requests were made.
Earlier, NABU and SAP exposed a large -scale scheme, whose participants received illegal access to closed court decisions. The suspects were monitored by judges’ decisions to grant searches and other investigative actions to warn their clients.
