Former head of the State Judicial Administration, Oleksiy Salnikov, in his interview with "Sudovo-yurydychna gazeta" (Judicial and Legal Newspaper), spoke about possible lobbying schemes during the digitalization of the judicial system, which, in his opinion, are directly related to the pressure exerted on him while in office, UNN reports.
Oleksiy Salnikov claims that during the preparation of the audit of the Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunication System (USITS), certain individuals persistently promoted a private company that was supposed to receive a multi-million dollar contract. Salnikov directly named the structure that, according to him, they tried to make the executor.
There was lobbying for a specific firm that would receive a multi-million dollar contract for the audit of the use of USITS in Ukraine. This is the company LLC "Civitta" - in fact, in my opinion, a vacuum cleaner for grant funds. The main ambassador of the digitalization process is Mr. Maselko (Roman Maselko - a member of the disciplinary commission of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine - ed.). I believe he could tell more about this.
According to him, he himself insisted on involving global auditing companies with an impeccable reputation – international brands capable of guaranteeing the quality of assessment and the security of key digital processes in the courts. In Salnikov's opinion, international companies would have completed the task faster, better, and cheaper. Salnikov believes that his position on the audit of Ukraine's information and telecommunication system was precisely the reason for the pressure on him.
It was necessary to conduct an audit of the Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunication System of Ukraine, but I insisted that one of the world-renowned companies be involved for this: Ernst&Young, Deloitte, PWC, KPMG, Baker Tilly. This did not suit certain individuals. Therefore, it was necessary to get rid of me, as an obstacle to the "correct" conclusion of a multi-million dollar contract for the audit. Ultimately, the audit was conducted with the involvement of LLC "Civitta Ukraine".
Salnikov also claims that criminal proceedings regarding digitalization have already been opened abroad, and he may be involved as a witness. He does not disclose details, explaining this by the requirements of the investigation.
The digitalization of the judiciary in Ukraine has been one of the key components of judicial reform for six years – from launching "Electronic Court" services to creating tools for remote participation in proceedings, integrating video conferences, and transitioning to electronic document management.
The Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunication System, which is intended to combine all these services, is designed to ensure transparency, automation, and the abandonment of paper procedures. That is why the audit of its work has become one of the most sensitive elements of the digital reform.
International partners, who finance part of the technical assistance, also play an active role in this process. It is the presence of grant programs and large contracts that has made the sphere of digitalization of the judicial system one of the most attractive for consulting companies.
Recall
In August 2025, the High Anti-Corruption Court sentenced the former head of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine, Oleksiy Salnikov, to 3 years in prison for abuse of influence.
On February 14, 2024, the SAP prosecutor, based on the materials of the NABU pre-trial investigation, sent an indictment to the court against the former head of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine, who was exposed for inciting the provision of undue advantage to Supreme Court judges for making a decision in favor of a commercial enterprise and for seizing other people's property by deception.
According to the investigation, in March 2023, the head of the SJA of Ukraine received 7.5 thousand US dollars from a person. He was supposed to keep part of these funds, and 5 thousand US dollars were allegedly to be transferred to the judges for making a decision in the interests of a commercial enterprise.