What problems most often arise with state registries? Do you see a way to solve these problems?
Today, many lawyers refer to the information contained in a state registry on the daily basis. Ideally, work with registries should be effective, or in other words, the achieved results should correspond to the resources expended, and to be effective – the compliance of the results with expectations. But while working with state registries, problems sometimes arise, affecting both efficiency and performance. Most of these problems are technical in nature.
With the help of the ID cards that replaced passports, individuals will not be able to register in the Office of Electronic Services, since the standard series and passport number (which are required during registration) has been replaced with a digital code. Therefore, the owner of an ID card will not be able to obtain, for example, an extract from the state register of rights to real estate.
The varification “I’m not a robot” (or CAPTCHA), which is implemented today when searching for information, for example, in the USR (and was also temporarily entered into the Register of court decisions), it is also a problem. So, due to the time that each lawyer spends to confirm that he is not a robot, information is protected. Why should this happen at the expense of lawyers, and not due to the introduction of the latest information protection technologies?
Trying to obtain an extract from the State Register of Rights to Real Estate, for example, for some company that has an extremely large amount of real estate, such an extract can be formed too long by the automated system or may be not formed at all. This is another obstacle for lawyer to the receive information quickly.
For lawyers who want to receive information from the USR about each of the enterprises included in the corporate structure of a group of companies, the automated system may offer to conduct a search request later, that is connected with a large number of requests that were made by a person. Of course, this is unacceptable when the deadlines run out, the client requires information as soon as possible, and the state registry still refuses to search information. In addition, the question arises: who determines the redundancy of the number of such information requests?
The above disadvantages are technical in nature and need to be improved by the administrator of such registries.
Should the entrance to the state register be free? Is it advisable to complicate the work with the registry, for example, by confirming that “I am not a robot”?
We are convinced that access to state registers should be free, because the goal of creating such registers is to ensure public access to such information as, for example, information about legal entities, high-profile court cases, encumbrances of real estate, etc. It should be emphasized that the introduction of verification to confirm that “I am not a robot” does not influence the possibility of free access to information contained in state registers. The CAPTCHA system is only an additional mechanism for protecting registry data.
Of course, you can discuss for a very long time the convenience of this system. So, sometimes even after choosing correct identifiers for a several time (like cars, food, store signs, etc.) CAPTCHA appears again and again. This, in turn, again leads to the inability to quickly get acquainted with certain information.
In our opinion, access can be complicated by the CAPTCHA system (“I’m not a robot”), if security measures and information protection really require it. Nevertheless, we consider it appropriate to propose the improvement of this system in order to make it more convenient (or as they say “user-friendly”). For example, trying to get information about Debit, the verification “I’m not a robot” may not be conducted with every search request, but with the first and next each hundredth (since bots usually comply with the thousands of requests per second).
UKRAINIAN LAWYER. №6 JUNE 2017