Oleksiy Shevchuk, a partner at BARRISTERS, JSC, moderated a discussion as part of the “Digital Crimes” module of the School of Criminal Practice.

LHS Discussion Hub: The provisions of the Ukrainian Criminal Code regarding crimes in the digital environment do not address contemporary challenges

As part of the “Digital Crimes” module of the School of Criminal Practice, the LHS Discussion Hub “The Invisible Threat: Criminal Law Issues in the Virtual World” took place. The discussion was moderated by Serhiy Sachenko, editor-in-chief of pravo.ua and director of IT projects at the “Yuridichna Praktika” publishing house, and Oleksiy Shevchuk, a partner at Barristers Law Firm. Speakers included: Stanislav Samoilov, Acting Deputy Head of the Directorate and Head of the First Division of Information Technology and Programming at the Cyberpolice Department of the National Police of Ukraine; Volodymyr Rudnichenko, Counsel at the Integrites Law Firm; Attorney Marina Matsegora; Barristers JSC attorneys Iryna Kuzina and Oleksandr Tananakin; the CEO of OBLAVAbot; and an attorney from Sayenko.

The regulatory framework for “digital” crimes is stuck in the “Stone Age.” Oleksiy Shevchuk is convinced of this. The problem, in his view, is that most issues related to cybercrimes are outlined in guidelines, but lawmakers very often overlook them, meaning the guidelines do not reflect modern realities. Even the provisions of the Criminal Code of Ukraine regarding crimes in the digital environment do not meet current challenges.

Ukraine’s greatest achievement in this context is the existence of electronic digital signatures, although only a small percentage of the population uses this service. The level of training for cyberpolice officers also leaves much to be desired. Shevchuk emphasized that today there are very few specialists who apply all the protocols for protecting their clients’ personal data; more often than not, unlicensed software or software produced by an aggressor country is used.

According to Yevhen Miroshnikov, the business community does not fully understand the importance of information security. Stanislav Samoilov agrees that Ukraine faces major problems with the concept of information security. The events of 2017 and the Petya virus demonstrated the need for preventive measures. “The government is not ready to combat cybercrime,” Shevchuk emphasized, adding that it was not the government but IT volunteers who saved Ukraine from the Petya virus. “Indeed, at that time, volunteers responded to the government’s calls for help,” noted the cyberpolice representative, adding that contrary to popular belief (which was shaped in particular by the media), the cyberpolice led the effort at that time, and it possessed more information than the active IT community.

Miroshnikov suggested that there should be a government-led campaign to promote cybersecurity and added that the low rate of reports to the cyber police depends on the level of public trust. Samoilov noted that the number of reports has been increasing recently, which indicates growing public trust in the cyber police. Marina Matsegora believes that lawyers also need to improve their IT literacy, since there is no longer any area of life without an electronic component. In today’s world, you can pay for coffee using your watch—the world will never be the same again.

The speakers also analyzed the issue of the admissibility of electronic evidence. Oleksiy Shevchuk is convinced that there is no proper way for investigators to prove that evidence extracted from a suspect’s server is exactly the same document that was submitted in paper form (photographs, tables, etc.) and is included in the case file. According to Volodymyr Rudnichenko, until there is appropriate legislative regulation, the issue of “digital evidence” will remain unresolved.