Kryvonos names reasons for NABU data leak: human factor, wide range of participants in investigation and technological interference
Data leaks from the NABU do take place, due to three factors.
This was stated by NABU Director Semen Kryvonos, Censor.NET reports citing ZN.ua.
As noted, Kryvonos named the human factor first. It can occur both due to accidental inattention or violation of procedures in a law enforcement agency, and due to the dishonest behaviour of employees within the agency.
"In a large institution, it is impossible to completely eliminate such risks, but we are systematically working to minimise them," said the NABU director, who is facing the history of leaks in the bureau for the second time during his tenure.
The second reason Kryvonos mentioned was the risk of leakage due to the involvement of a wide range of participants in the investigation.
"Pre-trial investigations involve not only detectives, but also experts, the State Financial Monitoring Service, state auditors, banks and other bodies to which we send requests. No one can guarantee that at some stage the data will not leak out," he stated.
The NABU director called technological interference the third factor, which was actually the interference with the Unified Register of Court Decisions of Dmytro Borzykh's law firm, and as it turned out, is by no means an exception for the law enforcement system.
Kryvonos noted that there is a serious difference between human and technological leaks, and it is on a completely different scale.
"We work with influential figures who have their own security services and know how to protect their data. Obtaining information in such an environment is a serious challenge that requires high qualifications and creativity of detectives," he commented on the Borzykh's case.
The NABU Director also denied claims that almost all of the defendants in their cases have "their own people in the NABU".
"One of the defendants did have contact with NABU detectives in his previous job, but this does not mean that he has contact with them. If you look at it more broadly, we have a lot of former police officers, SSU officers, tax police officers. These people have experience and may know the defendants. There are cases when detectives themselves declare a conflict of interest if their former colleagues are among the defendants. Then we remove them from the investigation team to avoid leaks. But there is no evidence that the organiser of the crimes committed by the group of lawyers influenced the NABU processes," Kryvonos said.
He also added that if someone in the NABU really had "their own people", then law firms would not have had to create complex systems of access to the register with the involvement of hackers. Although the situation when the bureau's employees do pass on information to third parties is not completely excluded.
Data leakage from NABU
Earlier, Censor.NET reported that the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, together with the National Police, was conducting searches at the NABU.
Later, the SAPO commented on the information about the search of one of the NABU employees. They noted that no searches or investigative actions were carried out at the NABU premises. The search was carried out exclusively at the place of residence of the current NABU employee - a detective of one of the units.
The Anti-Corruption Court allowed the SAPO to conduct searches at the home of the former head of the Brovary District State Administration Birkadze as part of the case of disclosure of pre-trial investigation data by a NABU detective.
Subsequently, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau launched a pre-trial investigation into the possible leak.
