Anti-Rating 2025: what open data the state has hidden from citizens
27 December 14:05
The past year has become a record year for the closure of data by the state. For the first time since the start of a full-scale war, the iron curtain has fallen on a significant amount of information at once: data on real estate, military-industrial companies, and even statistics from the Prosecutor General’s Office. Let’s find out whether the closure of data really contributes to national security.
The invasion of Russia in one day threw Ukraine back 6 years in terms of transparency and accessibility of public information. In the first days, the state closed the registers to protect information from the enemy, "Komersant Ukrainian" reports, citing OpenDataBot.
After a break, some government agencies – data managers – began publishing sets of data, just like before the great war. Currently, the Data Openness Rating in Ukraine hovers around 44%, and this year this figure risks falling even lower. After all, certain sets and indicators are closed even without legal grounds.
The main argument of the state in all cases remains the same: national security. However, the chosen approaches may have the opposite effect. The massive concealment of business data takes place without a clear distinction between really dangerous information and analytical data that does not pose military risks but is important for economic analysis, journalistic investigations, and public control.
The selective withholding of information only on open data platforms is particularly problematic. This approach not only does not protect, but can also harm, as it actually highlights which data is considered sensitive.
What data did the state close in 2025 ?
Data on companies in the military-industrial complex. However, this closure is fragmentary: only open data platforms like OpenDataBot are supposed to remove the information. This is probably the least risky and resonant closure: in October, the Cabinet of Ministers adopted Resolution No. 1257, which allows the closure of information about such companies on open data platforms upon their own request to the Ministry of Defense. In fact, from now on, businesses themselves determine what information about them should disappear and where exactly.
The rationale for this decision is clear, but the implementation raises questions: the data will be removed only from open data platforms, while it is still available in other places and registers. Formally, this is done for security reasons, but in practice it creates unequal conditions for access to information and complicates public control.
Closing declarations of officials from the NACP. The declarations of officials of various levels attract the attention of journalists from year to year. Currently, the declarations are mostly checked for the most risky reports, so the rest of the offending declarants have a chance to avoid responsibility. In many cases, it is the public and the media who, by checking the data in officials’ declarations, find violations and initiate further consideration of the situation.
At present, however, officials authorized to perform state or local government functions may withdraw their declarations from public access. Such an appeal is made by heads or deputy heads of state bodies, local governments, as well as heads (or deputies) of military, law enforcement and special bodies defined by law in relation to their subordinate declarants.
Opendatabot asked the NACP for the number of declarants who managed to hide their declarations, but in its response, the agency stated that it does not keep records of such information. Accordingly, it is currently virtually impossible to calculate who exactly, in what quantity and why withdrew their declarations from public scrutiny.
Data on the Real Estate Register. The state has closed information on real estate. This includes all real estate owned by businesses, as well as the property of citizens related to business: if such real estate is subject to encumbrances or leases from companies. Even land plots are now subject to the restrictions – it is now impossible to see their cadastral numbers in open sources. This decision was made on the basis of Law No. 4576-IX, which came into force in August 2025.
In practice, this decision creates room for manipulation: in particular, it is more difficult for businesses to verify information about real estate for their transactions and purposes, so the risks are increasing. Public control is also becoming more difficult: in fact, it is currently impossible or extremely difficult to expose dishonest companies and illegal land schemes.
Data on the AFU and desertions. Every month, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine publishes data on newly opened criminal proceedings by article. Since the beginning of the full-scale war, data on desertion and SZH have been the most controversial, especially given that this information has long been closed in Russia. However, in this case, open information about the state of affairs in the Ukrainian army helps to protect against manipulation and Russian propaganda. This was the case, for example, with the in accurate data in The Financial Times article in December 2024. Then, thanks to publicity and the availability of confirmed, verified data, the OpenDataBot managed to get the article amended.
In December 2025, the PGO stopped publishing this data, arguing that it was a state secret. However, no relevant laws or regulations were published to that effect.
“Closing information that has been publicly available for years does not achieve the stated goal of maintaining national security. This data has already been saved, copied and analyzed in the public space. Their disappearance only creates a false sense of security, while transparency and trust in the state are decreasing. In the fourth year of the war, it is clear that the mechanical tightening of the screws in the open data sphere does not eliminate real security risks. Instead, it weakens the analytical capabilities of the state and society, reduces transparency and potentially creates new threats,”
– comments Oleksiy Ivankin, founder of OpenDataBot.
