Forensic economic examination as a tool against economic crime under martial law in Ukraine

The unstable state of the country’s economy, exacerbated by the global financial crisis in recent years, has had a negative impact on the operations of many businesses. In addition, the martial law in Ukraine has exacerbated the problems associated with business crime. While studying the state of business crime, it is worth paying attention to the dynamics of official statistics.

The results of the analysis of statistical data on criminal offences in the field of economic activity in Ukraine from 2019 to February 2025 allowed us to identify certain trends and changes in economic crime. According to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine, in the period from 2019 to 2021, the number of registered criminal offences in the field of economic activity remained relatively stable, with slight fluctuations in the range of 5,000–7,000 cases annually. This corresponded to the average figures of the previous years and indicates the stability of the economic situation and regulatory authorities (Ofis Heneralnoho prokurora, 2019).

It should be noted that since 2020, Ukraine has introduced the institute of criminal offences, which has affected the classification of offences. In the field of economic activity, most offences remain classified as crimes, as they involve significant damage to the economy. Criminal misdemeanours in this area are less common and relate to less serious violations. At the same time, the number of registered criminal proceedings in the field of economic activity in 2020 amounted to 5,342, whereas in 2021 it slightly increased by 2.4% and amounted to 5,468 (Ofis Heneralnoho prokurora, 2020–2021).

With the beginning of the military aggression of the Russian Federation in 2022, the resources of law enforcement agencies were reoriented to ensure national security and defence, which led to a decrease in attention to economic offences, and therefore the processes of their registration and accounting became more complicated. As a result, in 2022, there was a significant decrease in the number of registered criminal offences in the field of economic activity. According to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine, in 2022, 3,414 such offences were registered, which is 37.6% less compared with the previous year (in 2021—5,468). In 2023, the number of criminal proceedings in the field of economic activity increased by 41.8% and it amounted to 4,840, in 2024— 5,139 (6.2% increase compared with the previous year). In general, according to the dashboard, in 2024, the number of criminal offences identified by the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine related to business amounted to 6,500 (Dashbord Ofisu Heneralnoho prokurora, 2024; Ofis Heneralnoho prokurora, 2019–2025, 2020–2021).

Thus, the results of the analysis of statistical data on criminal offences in economic activity in Ukraine for the period of 2019–2025 have made it possible to identify trends and the impact of external factors, such as military operations, on economic crime. At the same time, the dynamics of recent years indicate that crime has adapted to martial law in the country and is gradually increasing. Therefore, to our mind, the formation of an effective system of prevention of criminal offences in the field of economic activity in the future and reduction of the statistical indicator of offences committed in this area is unthinkable without the effective work of forensic economists and law enforcement agencies. This is owing to the fact that the process of proof is the leading stage in the investigation of economic crimes, and the appointment of forensic economic expertise is a mandatory and extremely necessary measure to achieve the truth in the case, identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice (Serhii et al., 2019).

The practice of considering economic crimes in the field of economic agents in many cases shows an insufficient level of awareness of investigators and judges regarding the classification structure of forensic economic examination of financial and economic activities of enterprises. As a result, often, the issues submitted for resolution by the expert go beyond his or her special knowledge and competence, which, in turn, indicates difficulties in determining the subject, object and typology of the relevant research.

That is why the organisation of investigation of crimes connected with financial economic activity, in the wide understanding, depends not only on the organs directly conducting the investigation, but also on partnerships with other stakeholders in the fight against crime. The content of partnership activities is revealed in cooperation to achieve common goals and objectives. One will notice that this approach in the context of forensic economic examination of financial and economic activities of enterprises is about coordinated communication activities aimed at improving the efficiency and quality of preventive work to prevent offences, by using the special knowledge of forensic economists to develop preventive proposals and their successful implementation in the performance of forensic economic examinations in the field of specialty: (11.2) ‘Analysis of documents reflecting the business activities of enterprises and organizations’. However, the current legislation does not contain a clear regulatory definition of this term, which creates the need for its in-depth scientific analysis.

In general, ‘interaction’ is one of the categories of cognition and is inextricably linked to such fundamental categories as movement, space, time and structure. Research has pointed out that interaction is one of the main categories of philosophy that reflects the processes of influence of various objects on each other, their mutual conditionality and change of state or intertransition, as well as the generation of another subject by one subject (dynamic relationship between subjects) (Holobutovskyy, 2016). In addition, it reflects the processes of action of different objects on each other, their mutual conditionality, change of state, intertransition and is defined as a process of integration activity of subjects. The essence of interaction is the inseparability of direct and reverse actions, an organic combination of changes of subjects that influence each other. This category is a holistic, internally differentiated, self-developing system. Such an understanding of interaction implies a mutual change of controlling and controlled actions, convinces of the need to consider changes in the interacting subjects and the interaction process itself as a change in its states (Khyt, 2023).

The fundamental importance of the category of ‘interaction’ for philosophy and scientific knowledge is due to the fact that all human activity in the real world, practice, our very existence and the sense of its reality (non-illusory) are based on various, primarily substantive, interactions that people carry out and use as a means of cognition, tools of action and a way of organising life. From the point of view of sociologists, the phenomenon of ‘interaction’ is defined as follows:

• –

  the process of direct or indirect influence of subjects on each other, which gives rise to the causality of their actions and interconnection; this process requires activity and mutual orientation of the actions of those people who participate in it;

• –

  mutual exchange of actions, organisation of mutual actions by people aimed at realisation of joint activities;

• –

  exchange of feelings, ideas, volitional impulses (Kozhushko, 2013).

Unlike the philosophical and sociological approaches to the definition of ‘interaction’, which describe it in a general theoretical sense, the legal profession faces a more complex and practical task—structuring and limiting such relationships in the legal field. Interaction is structured by norms that to a certain extent guide and limit the choice of means to achieve the relevant goals, and it is important to take into account how rules of behaviour are generated, in what conditions norms and values function, and how they are endowed with meanings in the course of the activity itself.

In our opinion, the interaction of forensic experts with other actors in the fight against crime, in particular on problematic issues related to the financial and economic activities of enterprises, is a complex process based not only on philosophical, social and regulatory aspects, but also should take into account the communication component, which is the basis on which any relationship is built. After all, the model of effective communication activity of forensic experts in the system of expert support of criminal proceedings is implemented primarily through the organisation of direct and indirect interaction with all participants in this activity and must be based on the principles of openness, accessibility, continuity of mutual information and self-education (Tkachenko, 2017). Thus, we can conclude that any interaction is based on communication between its participants.

The modern term ‘communication’ comes from the Latin word ‘communicatio’—unity, transmission, connection and communication. This term is related to the verb ‘communico’, which means to make common, communicate or connect, and has its root in the word ‘communis’—’common’. In Ukrainian, this concept is equivalent to the words ‘communicate’, ‘union’, ‘community’ and ‘communication’. All of them emphasise the idea of unity, association and connection between people or groups within a community.

The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Public Administration defines ‘communication’ as ‘the transmission and reception of information, orders, emotions, and the lifeblood of any organization, since one of the most important purposes of communication is to subordinate and coordinate the various elements of an organization’ (Surmin et al., 2010).

Communication is generally defined as ‘the process of social interaction through information messages’ (Lohunova et al., 2012), which are intended to inform, motivate, suggest, persuade and notify. Such an information exchange event is key for human society, as it facilitates the establishment of information links and understanding between its actors. Thus, communication activities not only transmit information, but also bring people together, reflecting commonality and interaction with each other (Illyuk, 2025).

In this context, it should be noted that ‘information’ and ‘communication’ are interrelated terms. The concept of ‘communication’, in the aspect of social interaction, is the exchange of thoughts, ideas, information transmitted from one medium to another by means of signs fixed on material media (Maistrenko, 2022). In other words, communication is the process of communicating and exchanging information, and its meaning, between two or more people. In contrast to communication, communication activity is a purposeful activity to provide conditions for the communication process, increase its effectiveness, establish feedback, analyse the effectiveness of communications and develop measures to improve the following communication actions (communication processes and individual actions that make them up) (Korotych, 2019).

Scientists also distinguish the concept of ‘communication potential’ (or ‘communication capacity’), which is proposed to be understood as the ability of a person or institution to communicate effectively and achieve its goals and objectives. This concept includes the ability to speak, listen, understand and meet the needs of the community. The communication capacity (or ‘communication capability’) of a state institution (and therefore state forensic institutions) means the totality of available human, technical, administrative and financial resources necessary to perform communication tasks. They define the development of communication capacity as ‘strengthening the skills, competencies and abilities of people or institutions to communicate effectively, deliver messages and achieve goals’ (Kosar et al., 2018).

It should be noted that the main directions of establishing and realising the communicative capacity by the subjects of forensic expert activity are as follows:

• –

  organisation of interaction of the subjects of forensic expert activity with the bodies of pre-trial investigation, court (judge);

• –

  organisation of interaction of the subjects of forensic expert activity with each other;

• –

  organisation of cooperation of the subjects of forensic activity, as far as possible with a sub-expert person;

• –

  organisation of interaction of subjects of forensic activity with other subjects of expert support of criminal proceedings (Tkachenko, 2017).

The communicative potential of the subjects of forensic activity will be effective when it is possible to fully achieve the set goals and objectives, which are as follows:

• –

  fulfillment of their professional duties in terms of timely and qualitative counselling of criminal proceedings;

• –

  providing informative assistance during the collection of evidence;

• –

  conducting forensic examination and drawing up the expert’s opinion as permissible proper evidence in criminal proceedings;

• –

  explanation of methods of execution of forensic examinations and certain aspects of the mechanism of criminal offence that require special knowledge (Tkachenko, 2017).

Establishment and realisation of communicative ability to effectively solve problems in forensic economic expertise of financial and economic activity of enterprises, requires a number of measures, as follows:

• 1)

  creation of a single information platform for the exchange of data between experts, investigators and judges, which will reduce the number of misunderstandings and delays;

• 2)

  regular holding of joint meetings and round tables to discuss these problematic issues and exchange of experience and develop joint decisions;

• 3)

  unification of the style of speech, terminology and formats of documents to facilitate mutual understanding;

• 4)

  promptly informing the subjects of such communication about changes in legislation in this area through internal ballots or emails;

• 5)

  Improvement of the electronic document management system to increase the efficiency of process automation and increase the promptness of information exchange;

• 6)

  promoting the formation of a unified professional culture of interaction by conducting interagency exercises and trainings on a given topic;

• 7)

  establishing regular feedback to improve the dialogue between participants, identify weaknesses and eliminate deficiencies by introducing a mechanism for assessing communication quality assessment;

• 8)

  development of methodological recommendations, publication of scientific aids and development of methodological recommendations for inter-subject interaction, which will help new employees better navigate the problematic issues of forensic economic expertise of financial and economic activity of enterprises;

• 9)

  formation of online and offline associations for permanent professional communication and exchange of experience on problematic issues that arise during the appointment and conduct of forensic economic expertise of financial and economic activity of enterprises and to stimulate mutual respect and constructiveness in communication between the parties;

• 10)

  integration of national and international databases for the exchange of evidence with a single access to the necessary information of all parties involved;

• 11)

  рublication of successful cases of cooperation for motivation and learning on the example of real effective mechanisms for joint solutions.

It should be emphasised that the above list is not exhaustive, as such measures will significantly increase the effectiveness of communication between all participants in forensic expert activity, which, in turn, will help ensure effective counteraction to economic crime during forensic economic expertise.

It should also be noted that institutional interaction involves not only communication between pre-trial investigations, court, expert institutions and experts, but also active participation of civil society institutions. Focusing on dialogue with society, openness and transparency, as well as the confidence of citizens on public authorities are key characteristics of effective management in the state. Public relations interaction is an important part of the activities of state institutions, because of the following:

• –

  it provides a mechanism for receiving feedback between the participants of the process;

• –

  allows to take into account public opinion on the implementation of state policy in a particular industry;

• –

  guarantees openness in the functioning of the authorities in the present.

We believe that ensuring institutional interaction with the public is an important step in democratisation and strengthening confidence in the expert justice system. Based on the above, we propose to determine the following levels of cooperation:

• 1)

  the level of integration interaction, which includes partnership;

• 2)

  the level of communicative capacity, which is manifested in information, counselling and dialogue;

• 3)

  the level of institutional interaction, which includes interaction with the public.

The modern understanding of the feasibility of using such forms of cooperation comes with the awareness of their socio-economic feasibility, which is manifested in improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the joint activity of its participants. Furthermore, they are convinced that the above forms of cooperation can be applied at several levels of interaction at the same time.

An example is the organisation and holding of a number of significant events such as the following:

• –

  holding round tables on forensic expert activity can be used for informing participants in the areas of solving problematic issues; moreover, during such information, other entities, during the discussion, may receive some kind of consultation on improving their activities; an additional opportunity for public dialogue is opened;

• –

  signing bilateral agreements between state and foreign judicial and expert institutions allows not only to have close partnerships, but also to integrate foreign experience into domestic expert practice.

One of the steps towards improving cooperation between all entities at each level of interaction can be an assessment of the effectiveness of measures at each level of such cooperation, for which it is advisable to develop an index model that would be based on evaluating each level by certain coefficients.