Anti-rating 2025: which open data the state closed this year

Russia’s invasion pushed Ukraine back by 6 years in transparency and access to public information. In the first days of the war, the state closed public registers to protect information from the enemy.

After some time, some government bodies started publishing data again, as they did before the full-scale war. Now, the Open Data Transparency Rating in Ukraine is about 44%, and this year it may fall even lower. Some datasets and indicators are being closed without legal reasons.

The main argument from the government is always the same — national security. However, this approach can have the opposite effect. A lot of business data is hidden without a clear difference between truly dangerous information and analytical data. This analytical data does not create military risks, but it is very important for economic analysis, journalism, and public control.

The most problematic issue is selective data closure only on open data platforms. This does not really protect anything and can even be harmful, because it clearly shows which data the state considers sensitive.

What data did the state close in 2025? ​

Data about companies of the military-industrial complex. However, this closure is partial. The information must be removed only from open data platforms, such as Opendatabot. This is probably the least risky and most understandable closure. In October, the Cabinet of Ministers adopted Resolution № 1257. It allows such companies to close their data on open data platforms after their own request to the Ministry of Defense. In practice, businesses can now decide themselves which information about them should disappear and where.

The reason for this decision is clear, but the way it is implemented raises questions. The data will be removed only from open data platforms, while in other places and state registers it is still available. Officially, this is done for security reasons, but in reality it creates unequal access to information and makes public oversight more difficult.

Closure of officials’ asset declarations by NACP. Declarations of public officials at different levels attract a lot of attention from journalists every year. Now, declaration checks are mostly focused only on the most risky cases. Because of this, other officials who violate the rules may avoid responsibility. In many cases, it is journalists and civil society who find problems in officials’ declarations and start further investigation.

However, now public officials can hide their asset declarations. Officials who perform state or local government functions are allowed to remove their declarations from public access. Such requests are made by heads or deputy heads of state bodies, local authorities, and also by heads (or deputies) of military, law enforcement, and special agencies for the officials under their control.

Opendatabot asked the National Agency on Corruption Prevention (NACP) how many officials have hidden their declarations. In its reply, the agency said it does not keep records of this information. As a result, it is currently impossible to know who exactly hid their declarations, how many people did this, and for what reasons.

Real estate register data. The state also closed access to information about real estate. This includes all property owned by businesses, as well as property owned by individuals if it is linked to business activity. For example, if the property is under encumbrance or rented by companies. Even land plots are now restricted — their cadastral numbers can no longer be seen in open sources. This decision was made based on Law № 4576-IX, which came into force in August 2025.

In practice, this creates room for manipulation. It has become harder for businesses to check real estate information for deals and planning, which increases risks. Public oversight is also much more difficult. In fact, exposing dishonest companies and illegal land schemes is now impossible or extremely hard.

Data on AWOL and desertion. Every month, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine publishes data on newly opened criminal cases by type of crime. Since the start of the full-scale war, data on desertion and AWOL (unauthorized absence from a military unit) has been one of the most debated topics — especially because this information has long been closed in Russia.

However, in Ukraine, open data about the real situation in the army helps protect society from manipulation and Russian propaganda. For example, this was important in December 2024, when The Financial Times published incorrect figures. Thanks to public discussion and verified open data, Opendatabot managed to get corrections made to the article.

In December 2025, the Prosecutor General’s Office stopped publishing this data, saying it is a state secret. At the same time, no laws or official legal acts were published to clearly justify this decision.

“Closing information that had been openly available for years does not achieve the stated goal of protecting national security. This data has already been saved, copied, and analyzed in the public space. Its removal only creates a false sense of safety, while transparency and trust in the state decrease. In the fourth year of the war, it is clear that simply tightening control over open data does not remove real security risks. Instead, it weakens the analytical capacity of the state and society, reduces transparency, and may create new risks,”

— says Oleksii Ivankin, founder of Opendatabot.