A NEW FORM OF ORGANIZED CRIME: CHALLENGES OF COUNTERACTING SHADOW GENOMIC LABORATORIES SPREAD THROUGH VIRTUAL COMMUNICATION CHANNELS

This article examines the phenomenon of shadow genomic laboratories as an emerging form of organized crime developing at the intersection of biotechnology, digital communications, and criminal network practices. The relevance of the study is determined by the transformation of the criminal environment, in which illegal operations involving genetic information and biotechnological resources are increasingly disseminated through virtual communication channels, significantly complicating their detection, legal classification, and suppression. The aim of the study is to identify institutional and legal gaps in the system for countering shadow genomic laboratories and to develop an interdisciplinary model of state response to biodigital crime. The methodological framework comprises content analysis of scientific literature, comparative legal analysis of international practices, an online survey, and structural modeling. The findings demonstrate that in Kazakhstan, this emerging threat is characterized by potentially high levels of latency, insufficient interagency coordination, and regulatory uncertainty concerning new biodigital risks. A national counteraction model is proposed, incorporating six interconnected stages of institutional response: monitoring, detection, risk assessment, interagency coordination, legal suppression, and follow-up control. The model is supplemented by proposals to improve the regulatory framework, strengthen digital monitoring mechanisms, and enhance cooperation among government authorities, research institutions, and law enforcement agencies. The practical significance of the study lies in the potential application of the proposed approaches to developing a national system for preventing and suppressing emerging forms of organized crime associated with the illicit use of genomic and digital technologies.

1. Hoffmann S. A., Diggans J., Densmore D., Dai J., Knight T., Leproust E., Boeke J. D., Wheeler N., Cai Y. (2023) Safety by design: Biosafety and biosecurity in the age of synthetic genomics // iScience. Vol. 26. No. 3. P. 106165. DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.106165. [in English]

2. Millett P. (2020) The synthetic-biology challenges for biosecurity // Health Security. Vol. 18, Suppl. 1. P. 8–14. DOI: 10.1080/10736700.2020.1866884. [in English]

3. Liu T., Wang Q., Yan Y., Chen Y., Du X., Zhang X. (2024) Advancements in DNA-based information security // Patterns.Vol. 5. No. 10. P. 101012. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2024.101012. [in English]

4. Tuazon O. M., Wickenheiser R. A., Ansell R., Guerrini C. J., Zwenne G.-J., Custers B. (2024) Law enforcement use of genetic genealogy databases in criminal investigations: Nomenclature, definition and scope // Forensic Science International: Synergy. Vol. 8. P. 100460. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100460. [in English]

5. Son J., Kim Y. W., Oh D. B., Park J., Lee S., Kim K. (2022) Forensic analysis of instant messengers: Decrypt Signal, Wickr, and Threema // Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation. Vol. 40. P. 301347. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsidi.2022.301347. [in English]

6. Sarhan Q. U., Aleroud A., Alenezi M., Sleit A. (2023) A framework for digital forensics of encrypted real-time messaging // Ain Shams Engineering Journal. Vol. 14, No.1. P. 102069. DOI: 10.1016/j.asej.2022.102069. [in English]

7. Afzal S., Mukhtar H., Farooq U., Shahzad F. (2021) A systematic literature review on darknet market analysis and detection techniques // Applied Sciences.Vol. 11. No. 17.P. 7789.DOI: 10.3390/app11177789. [in English]

8. Reedy P. (2023) Interpol review of digital evidence for 2019.2022 // Forensic Science International: Synergy. Vol. 6. P. 100313. DOI: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100313. [in English]

9. Thomas M., Shah P., Vora J. (2024) Assessing privacy vulnerabilities in genetic data sets // JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology. Vol. 5, No. 1. P. 54332. DOI: 10.2196/54332. [in English]

10. Brown T., Kayser M. (2024) Forensic genetics in the shadows: Law enforcement access to clinical DNA // Journal of Law and the Biosciences. Vol. 11. No. 1. Article ID: lsae028. DOI: 10.1093/jlb/lsae028. [in English]

11. Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan. (2022) On Biological Safety of the Republic of Kazakhstan: Law dated May 21, 2022 No. 122-VII LRK // Adilet Legal Information System. URL: https://adilet.zan.kz/eng/docs/Z2200000122 [in English] (accessed: 15.04.2026).

12. Penal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan: Code dated July 3, 2014 No. 226.V // Adilet Legal Information System. 2014. URL: https://adilet.zan.kz/eng/docs/K1400000226 [in English] (accessed: 18.04.2026).

13. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Screening Framework Guidance for Providers and Users of Synthetic Nucleic Acids // Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response. 2023. – URL: https://aspr.hhs.gov/S3/Pages/Synthetic-Nucleic-Acids.aspx [in English] (accessed: 20.04.2026).

14. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 9: Processing of Special Categories of Personal Data // General Data Protection Regulation. 2016. URL: https://gdpr-info.eu/art-9-gdpr/ [in English] (accessed: 25.04.2026).

15. DataReportal. Digital 2024: Kazakhstan // DataReportal. 2024. URL: https://datareportal.com/reports/digital2024-kazakhstan [in English] (accessed: 20.04.2026).

16. Nuclear Threat Initiative, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, Economist Impact. Kazakhstan // Global Health Security Index. 2021. URL: https://ghsindex.org/country/kazakhstan/ [in English] (accessed: 20.04.2026).

17. World Health Organization. Laboratory Biosafety Manual. 4th ed. // World Health Organization. – Geneva: WHO, 2020. URL: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240011311 [in English] (accessed: 25.04.2026).