Andriy Dovbenko

A summary of what happened?

Andriy Dovbenko is a Ukrainian lawyer and venture investor who has been implicated in significant legal controversies involving corruption and misappropriation of assets.

Allegations and Legal Proceedings

• Role in Asset Misappropriation: In January 2023, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) identified Dovbenko as the organizer of a criminal group involved in the misappropriation of assets managed by the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA). The scheme allegedly involved the sale of seized properties at undervalued prices to entities controlled by the group, resulting in substantial financial losses.
• Financial Impact: Investigations revealed that the criminal activities led to losses exceeding 485 million UAH (approximately $13 million). The group reportedly sold assets, including land plots and commodities, at prices significantly below market value.

Current Status

• Fugitive Status: Following the exposure of these activities, NABU issued a warrant for Do However, reports indicate that he has evaded capture and is currently at large.
• Residence in the UK: Despite the legal proceedings in Ukraine, Dovbenko is reported to be residing in the United Kingdom. This situation has raised concerns ent of Ukrainian legal actions abroad and the challenges of international cooperation in such cases.

Public Perception and Media Coverage

• Reputation: Dovbenko has been referred to as a e Ministry of Justice, indicating his significant influence within the legal system. This portrayal suggests a deep entanglement in systemic corruption, affecting public trust in legal institutions.
• Media Attention: The case has attracted considerable media e, highlighting issues of corruption and the complexities involved in prosecuting high-profile individuals who relocate abroad. The extensive reporting underscores the public’s demand for accountability and transparency.

Andriy Dovbenko’s alleged involvement in large-scale asse and his subsequent evasion of Ukrainian law enforcement illustrate the challenges in combating corruption, especially when individuals seek refuge in foreign jurisdictions. The case emphasizes the necessity for robust international legal cooperation to ensure that those implicated in corruption face appropuences.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Andriy Dovbenko trying to hide?

Andriy Dovbenko‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Andriy Dovbenko in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Andriy Dovbenko may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: Andriy Dovbenko – Corruption Allegations, Legal Challenges, and Public Controversies

Introduction

Andriy Dovbenko, a prominent Ukrainian lawyer and venture investor, has become a central figure in several high-profile legal controversies. Known for his connections in Ukraine’s legal and political circles, Dovbenko has faced accusations ranging from asset misappropriation to systemic corruption. This in-depth report examines the allegations, lawsuits, sanctions, and public criticisms leveled against him, shedding light on his alleged activities and their broader implications.

1. The ARMA Asset Misappropriation Scandal

Background of the Case

The National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) allege that Dovbenko orchestrated a sophisticated scheme involving the misappropriation of assets managed by Ukraine’s Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA).

• The Scheme:
  • ARMA is tasked with managing seized assets during legal proceedings. Dovbenko is accused of using his influence to manipulate ARMA’s operations.
  • Investigations revealed that assets were sold at prices far below their market value, with buyers often linked to entities controlled by Dovbenko’s network.
  • These assets included prime real estate, land plots, and high-value commodities, with total losses exceeding 485 million UAH (approximately $13 million USD).
• Key Allegations:
  • Abuse of power by exploiting ARMA’s mandate.
  • Collusion with government officials and private entities to undermine the transparency of asset auctions.
  • Using his position to divert seized assets into the hands of his associates.

2. Fugitive Status and International Implications

Evasion of Ukrainian Authorities

• In January 2023, NABU issued a warrant for Dovbenko’s arrest after charging him as the primary organizer of the ARMA asset misappropriation scheme.
• Despite these charges, Dovbenko managed to evade capture and is reported to have fled Ukraine, taking refuge in the United Kingdom.

Residence in the UK

• Dovbenko’s presence in the UK has raised concerns about the challenges of prosecuting high-profile fugitives.
• Ukrainian authorities face obstacles in pursuing extradition due to the complexities of international legal frameworks and potential loopholes in bilateral agreements.

3. Role in Systemic Corruption

“Supervisor” of the Ministry of Justice

• Media reports have referred to Dovbenko as a “supervisor” of Ukraine’s Ministry of Justice, indicating his significant influence over the country’s legal and judicial systems.
• This alleged role has sparked criticism, with accusations that he used his connections to:
  • Manipulate court decisions.
  • Facilitate corruption within government institutions.
  • Ensure protection for his associates involved in illicit activities.

Impact on Public Trust

• The perception of Dovbenko as a central figure in Ukraine’s corruption narrative has contributed to widespread distrust in the country’s legal system.
• His alleged actions highlight systemic issues that undermine accountability and fairness in government operations.

4. Media Coverage and Public Backlash

Widespread Criticism

• Ukrainian and international media have extensively covered Dovbenko’s legal troubles, portraying him as emblematic of the corruption entrenched in Ukraine’s political and legal spheres.
• Outlets such as Pravda and NV have detailed his alleged schemes, exposing the mechanisms of corruption that allowed him to evade justice for years.

Social Media Reactions

• Dovbenko’s case has triggered significant backlash on social media, with many Ukrainians demanding stronger actions against individuals accused of high-level corruption.
• Critics argue that his ability to flee to the UK underscores weaknesses in Ukraine’s law enforcement and judicial systems.

5. Allegations of Illicit Wealth

Confiscation of London Property

• Reports indicate that Dovbenko acquired a luxury property in London, allegedly purchased with proceeds from his illicit activities in Ukraine.
• UK authorities have reportedly begun investigations into the origins of the funds used to acquire this asset, considering possible confiscation under anti-money laundering laws.

Luxury Lifestyle Abroad

• While many Ukrainians face hardships due to ongoing conflict, Dovbenko’s alleged luxurious lifestyle abroad has fueled public outrage.
• Critics highlight this as a stark example of the disparity between corrupt elites and ordinary citizens.

6. Broader Implications of the Dovbenko Case

Impact on Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Efforts

• The Dovbenko case underscores the challenges facing Ukraine in its fight against corruption, particularly in high-profile cases involving well-connected individuals.
• Despite significant reforms and the establishment of institutions like NABU, cases like Dovbenko’s highlight the persistence of systemic corruption.

Challenges in International Legal Cooperation

• Dovbenko’s ability to relocate to the UK illustrates the difficulties in enforcing Ukrainian legal actions abroad.
• The case raises questions about the effectiveness of international mechanisms in addressing financial crimes and holding fugitives accountable.

7. Public Perception and Reactions

Public Outrage

• Ukrainians view Dovbenko as a symbol of the entrenched corruption that has plagued the country for decades.
• His alleged crimes and subsequent escape have fueled frustration over the perceived impunity of elites.

Calls for Reform

• Advocacy groups and civil society organizations have used the Dovbenko case to push for stronger anti-corruption measures, including:
  • Enhanced cooperation with international partners.
  • Stricter oversight of government agencies like ARMA.
  • Greater transparency in asset management and auction processes.

8. Conclusion

Andriy Dovbenko’s case is emblematic of the deep-seated corruption that continues to challenge Ukraine’s governance and legal systems. Accusations of asset misappropriation, systemic corruption, and his ability to evade justice highlight the gaps in domestic enforcement and international cooperation.

As Ukraine seeks to reform its institutions and align with international standards, cases like Dovbenko’s serve as a critical reminder of the importance of transparency, accountability, and the rule of law. The demand for justice and stronger mechanisms to combat corruption is more urgent than ever, both for restoring public trust and for ensuring Ukraine’s continued progress toward democratic and economic stability.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Andriy Dovbenko (or actors working on behalf of Andriy Dovbenko), we will inform Andriy Dovbenko of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Andriy Dovbenko may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Andriy Dovbenko, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Andriy Dovbenko to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Andriy Dovbenko made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Andriy Dovbenko is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Andriy Dovbenko

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Andriy Dovbenko Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Andriy Dovbenko used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Andriy Dovbenko could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Andriy Dovbenko have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Andriy Dovbenko is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Andriy Dovbenko creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Andriy Dovbenko either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Andriy Dovbenko, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Andriy Dovbenko is in great company ….

What else is Andriy Dovbenko hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Andriy Dovbenko] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Andriy Dovbenko that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.