Executive Summary
Problem Statement:
Wartime and reconstruction-phase Ukraine faces continuous critical incidents: infrastructure damage, civilian harm events, resource theft, safety violations, and corruption allegations. Current incident reporting is fragmented across agencies (police, military, ombudsman, prosecutors), with no unified evidence chain. This creates accountability gaps where responsibility is unclear, evidence disappears, and investigations stall.
ETHRAEON Solution:
A governance layer that captures incident reports from any authorized source (citizens, officials, international observers), generates tamper-evident audit trails, and routes incidents to appropriate investigative authorities-while preserving evidence integrity even if investigations are delayed or obstructed.
Core Value: Incidents become evidence by construction. Whether the incident is a bridge collapse, a civilian casualty, or a procurement fraud allegation, the initial report and all subsequent investigative steps are cryptographically locked, preventing retroactive narrative manipulation.
Incident Types Covered
️ Infrastructure Damage
Civilian Harm Events
Resource Theft/Fraud
⚠️ Safety Violations
⚖️ Corruption Allegations
Whistleblower Reports
Fragmentation Problem
Current State: Same incident (e.g., building collapse) may generate 5 separate reports across 5 agencies with no automated cross-referencing:
- National Police of Ukraine: Handles civilian criminal complaints via 102 hotline
- Prosecutor General's Office: Investigates corruption and serious crimes
- Ombudsman Office: Receives citizen grievances (human rights, administrative abuse)
- Ministry of Defense: Internal incident reporting for military operations
- Local Governments: Infrastructure damage reports, safety violations
- International Organizations: OSCE, UN monitors document war crimes and humanitarian law violations
Gap Impact:
- Agencies unaware of overlapping investigations (resource waste)
- Evidence custody unclear (who holds original documents, photos, witness statements?)
- Retroactive editing possible (incident severity downgraded, timelines altered)
- No accountability for investigative delays ("lost" incidents)
Incident Intake & Evidence Locking
Authorized Reporting Sources
| Source Type |
Access Method |
Identity Handling |
| Citizens |
102 hotline, web portal, mobile app |
Optional anonymization for whistleblowers |
| Government Officials |
Ministry field officers, local administrators |
Plaintext (official capacity) |
| Law Enforcement |
Police officers, prosecutors, investigators |
Plaintext with badge number |
| International Observers |
OSCE monitors, UN human rights officers, ICRC |
Plaintext with organizational credentials |
| Automated Systems |
Infrastructure sensors, safety systems |
System ID (e.g., bridge load monitor #47) |
Initial Report Evidence Node
- Incident Type: Infrastructure damage | Civilian harm | Theft/fraud | Safety violation | Corruption allegation | Other
- Location: GPS coordinates + administrative unit (oblast, city, address)
- Timestamp: Exact time of incident (if known) OR time of report
- Reporter Identity: Hashed (anonymized if whistleblower) OR plaintext if official source
- Narrative: Incident description (text, up to 2000 chars)
- Attachments: Photos, videos, documents (stored as hashes, files encrypted if sensitive)
- Severity Assessment: Critical | High | Medium | Low
Evidence Lock:
Upon submission, ETHRAEON generates SHA-256 hash of entire report. This hash is immutable-any later modification creates new hash, preserving original as evidence. Timestamps are cryptographically signed to prevent backdating.
Investigative Workflow
Automated Routing
Based on incident type and severity, ETHRAEON automatically routes report to appropriate authority:
| Incident Type |
Primary Authority |
Secondary (if escalated) |
| Infrastructure damage |
Local government + Ministry responsible for asset type |
State Emergency Service (if critical) |
| Civilian harm |
National Police → Prosecutor if criminal |
Ombudsman (if human rights angle) |
| Theft/Fraud |
National Police → NABU if corruption |
State Audit Service (if government funds) |
| Safety violation |
State Labor Service OR sector regulator |
Prosecutor (if fatalities) |
| War crimes |
Prosecutor General (War Crimes Unit) |
International Criminal Court liaison |
Audit Trail Nodes
Every investigative action generates an evidence node:
- Assignment: Incident assigned to investigator (name, badge, timestamp)
- Evidence Collection: New documents, photos, witness statements added (each hashed)
- Site Visit: Physical inspection logged (GPS, timestamp, findings)
- Status Updates: "Under investigation" → "Pending review" → "Closed" (reason required)
- Escalation: If transferred to higher authority, handoff logged with reason
Constitutional Controls
- T5 Rule: Incident reports cannot be deleted (append-only)
- Whistleblower Protection: Anonymous reporters' identities encrypted, accessible only by court order
- Temporal Integrity: Timestamps cryptographically signed (prevents backdating evidence)
- Chain of Custody: Every evidence handoff logged (investigator A → prosecutor B)
- Judicial Seal: Courts can seal evidence during active prosecutions (prevents witness tampering)
Pilot Deployment Framework
| Phase |
Scope |
Duration |
Success Metric |
| Phase 1: Single Oblast |
1 regional police + local government + ombudsman |
8 weeks |
500 incidents logged, 95% audit trail completeness |
| Phase 2: Multi-Agency |
3 oblasts + National Police HQ + Prosecutor's Office |
16 weeks |
Cross-agency incident matching (detect duplicates) |
| Phase 3: National + International |
All agencies + OSCE/UN observer integration |
24 weeks |
War crimes evidence chain accepted by ICC liaison |
Economic Model
- Pilot Cost: $65K for Phase 1 (8 weeks, single oblast)
- National Scale: $150K/year (all agencies, ongoing maintenance)
- ROI Indicators:
- 30% reduction in investigative delays (evidence immediately available)
- 50% reduction in duplicate investigations (cross-agency visibility)
- International credibility gains (war crimes accountability, EU rule-of-law benchmarks)
Key Partners
- Ukrainian Government: National Police, Prosecutor General's Office, Ombudsman, State Emergency Service
- Anti-Corruption: NABU, State Audit Service
- International: OSCE (monitoring mission), UN Human Rights, ICRC, ICC (war crimes unit)
- Civil Society: Transparency International Ukraine, anti-corruption NGOs
Integration: Existing Systems
ETHRAEON does NOT replace:
- Police case management systems (internal workflows)
- Prosecutor databases (legal case files)
- Emergency dispatch systems (102 hotline routing)
ETHRAEON provides:
- Upstream APIs for incident intake (any agency can submit)
- Immutable audit trail storage (evidence layer beneath operational systems)
- Cross-agency dashboards (see all incidents related to specific location/person/organization)
- Export bundles for international investigations (ICC, ECHR)
Next Steps
- Pilot Oblast Selection: Identify test region (Lviv Oblast recommended: mixed urban/rural, active OSCE presence)
- Agency Coordination: MoU with National Police, Prosecutor's Office, Ombudsman
- Technical Deployment: 8-week implementation timeline from MoU signature
- Training: Field officer workshops (incident intake procedures)
- Evaluation: Independent audit comparing pre/post accountability metrics