SAA top executive faces criminal charges over sensitive data

A criminal complaint has been filed against South African Airways (SAA) head of sales and marketing Carla da Silva and several other staff members that report to her.

The charge was laid last week by her former employer, Airlink, and comes on the heels of civil action for the alleged theft of sensitive data from the airline.

The complaint alleges industrial espionage and theft of incorporeal property after Da Silva purportedly copied a key database containing sensitive information belonging to Airlink.

ALSO READ: ‘SAA must delete data from Airlink’: Court orders airline to stop using info

Theft of incorporeal property

It is alleged Da Silva copied the information prior to leaving the private airline’s employment late last year.

Airlink chief executive Rodger Foster said the company was compelled to report it as a suspected crime.

“Airlink has reported the matter to the law enforcement authorities for possible prosecution of Ms da Silva and other ex-employees who may be guilty of the same conduct,” he said.

The complaint includes the registration of a criminal case of theft of incorporeal property in terms of the Cybercrimes Act.

Incorporeal property is the intangible assets that lack physical form but hold value or legal rights. This can take the shape of intellectual property like the Airlink database, for example, goodwill and financial instruments. These assets are protected by law.

A report was filed with the Hawks in terms of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, which was reportedly reviewed by the Priority Crime Management Centre, who have since issued a reference number in this regard, a source close to the investigation told The Citizen. In other words, an investigation is underway.

ALSO READ: High-flying drama: SAA warned not to use Airlink info

Forensic investigator Chad Thomas of IRS Forensic Investigators said that the criminal complaint laid by Airlink could be a game-changer.

“In the past, it was very difficult to prove the espionage, but with the Cybercrimes Act coming into effect in December 2021, has provided a mechanism for defining the theft of incorporeal property as being the same as the common law charge of theft.”

In her responding civil affidavit, Da Silva argued the information Airlink claimed was proprietary, was in fact freely available publicly. She also suggested that Airlink had simply threatened, but not acted on its allegations. Not so, said Foster.

“Airlink is confident it has irrefutable evidence and grounds for the civil action it has brought against Ms da Silva and her co-respondents.”

Sensitive and confidential data

Airlink’s affidavit claimed the information was proprietary, sensitive and confidential.

Foster added since commencing civil action and laying a criminal complaint, it had become aware of a further data breach.

“We have since been made aware of and have evidence of more suspected breaches, and will follow our rights accordingly,” he said.

A source told The Citizen the fresh discovery related to copied budgets, allegedly also with Da Silva at the centre of it.

ALSO READ: Deputy President Mashatile not ruling out SAA sale in the future – report

Foster said Airlink reported the matter to industry bodies and regulators.

“Similarly, we were duty-bound to notify affected industry bodies such as the International Air Transport Association, affected travel agents and the Information Regulator of South Africa of the data breach and the circumstances thereof.”

Airlink first went to court in April to compel SAA to destroy the company’s information held by Da Silva and staff. Foster said that they complied.

“The respondents [SAA, Da Silva and others] complied with the high court order to confirm under oath that they have deleted the electronic file with Airlink proprietary information and all variants thereof,” Foster said.

SAA did not respond to any questions from The Citizen.

Da Silva responded by e-mail saying: “As you know, this matter is being opposed by SAA and is currently pending in court.”