The government announces a complete digitalization of sectors, but the Cadastre and electronic courts cannot "understand" each other. The Ministry of Justice, as usual, promises to resolve the data exchange issue. In the meantime, citizens are forced to gather certificates and signed documents from state bodies to register their property rights.
The Cadastre Committee requires a second stamped version of the electronic court decision from the citizen for state property registration, which certifies that the decision has entered into legal force. If such a document is not available, the citizen or legal entity must present other evidence, such as a certificate from the Judicial Department, a letter from the judge's staff, or other documents. Without this additional confirmation, the Cadastre does not carry out property registration.
Lawyers also often express dissatisfaction with the shortcomings of electronic systems. Lawyer Gevond Papoyan notes that the issue of system interoperability could have been resolved in advance, but the problem remains unresolved: "As long as the issue is not raised, it does not get solved."
In fact, although the courts have transitioned to electronic systems, they do not communicate with other state bodies. Unable to independently verify the fact of the legal force of the decision, state structures place this obligation on the citizen. A person obtains information from one state body that is already present in the electronic system of another. This not only overloads the courts and increases bureaucracy but also devalues the main purpose of electronic justice — saving time and resources.
The main idea of digitalization is that the state should not require from the citizen the information that is already available in the database of another state body. With this approach, not the entire service is digitalized, but only its individual stages: the citizen continues to be a link transferring information between state structures, collecting documents that have already been created and stored in state systems.
The problem is also deepened by the lack of trust in state systems. The official source of information about the legal force of a judicial act is the information system "Datalex", but the Cadastre Committee does not actually trust the records available there. This also has objective reasons: data in the system is not always updated in a timely manner. As a result, the electronic document is equated to the paper one, requiring numerous additional confirmations, which reduces the effectiveness of digitalization.
All this indicates that the success of digitalization depends not only on creating separate electronic platforms. If systems do not interact with each other, digitalization does not become a faster and simpler service; it merely changes the form of bureaucracy.
The Ministry of Justice confirmed to "Hetq" that the problem exists and is due to the lack of interoperability between systems. The agency reported that the software work ensuring data exchange between the electronic systems of the Cadastre Committee and Civil Procedure has already been completed. As a result, the Cadastre will be able to independently verify through electronic inquiry whether the judicial act has entered into legal force.
In practice, however, the problem is not resolved. The ministry notes that the solution will be implemented in the production environment "in the near future". This means that until then, citizens will continue to bear the consequences of system incompatibility, presenting additional certificates and confirmations.
The agency also reported that a similar mechanism is planned to be implemented in the electronic systems of administrative proceedings and bankruptcy. At the same time, it is noted that apart from the Cadastre Committee, no similar alerts have been received from other state bodies.
The Cadastre Committee also confirmed to "Hetq" that without additional evidence, property registration based solely on the electronic decision is not carried out, and added that they are working on resolving the issue programmatically with the Ministry of Justice.
