Legality of Electronic Evidence

If you are a victim of theft, fraud, forgery, copyright infringement, or other crimes, you may need your digital evidence to back up your claims. Simply put, whenever you need irrefutable evidence that you`ve done something or something has been done, digital proof can be there to support you. Studies show that the issue differs slightly in mixed management laws, where the law determines in advance whether certain evidence is appropriate to prove certain facts or not. Sometimes the law sets conditions for the acceptance of evidence; In other circumstances, however, a judge may be allowed to consider the validity of the evidence as evidence. An example of the former is the Japanese legislature, which limits acceptable evidence to the testimony of the accused, witnesses, physical evidence and expert testimony in the field. When assessing, the judge should take into account each party`s position with respect to the electronic evidence submitted, particularly if the opposing party refuses (contests) its validity. Insa F (2007) The admissibility of electronic evidence in court (AEEC): fighting high-tech crime – results of a European study. J Digit Forensic Pract 1(4):285–289. doi.org/10.1080/15567280701418049 Difficulties regarding the extent of authenticity of digital evidence in court proceedings and the attempt to develop solutions for this led to a legally approved procedure. The procedure reads: «Before digital evidence is admitted as criminal evidence in court, technicians, computer and information technology specialists must verify its authenticity and their relationship to the crime to be tried.» If this proof is authentic, it will provide full proof. The costs, expenses and fees arising from the review are the sole responsibility of the party making the challenge; Similarly, if the challenge was reckless according to the judgment of the General Court, it may also impose a fine of between EUR 120 and EUR 600 in Spain (Article 320(3) of the LEC). Similarly, the possibility of going to a notary to confirm what has been printed only corresponds to what is displayed and does not guarantee that the evidence has not been falsified. It merely proves that the document provided contains the same information as that which the notary saw on the screen of the electronic device.

Due to the significant and rapid development of computer technology and the Internet, new types of crime have emerged. These crimes are diverse and criminals use different methods to commit them. Due to the speed at which electronic crimes are committed and the simple suppression of their evidence, it has become difficult to obtain, identify and classify evidence. This makes it difficult for investigators to prove the crimes and bring the accused to justice. Egypt`s Law No. 175 of 2018 on Combating Crimes in the Field of Information Technology defines electronic evidence as «any electronic information that has proven force or value, that is stored, transmitted, extracted or acquired by computers, information networks and others, and that can be collected and analyzed using equipment, specialized software or technological applications» (Abdel-Muttalib 2006). Wu H, Zheng G (2020) Electronic Evidence in the Blockchain Age: New Rules of Authenticity and Integrity. Comput Law Secur Rev.

36:105401. doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105401 Due to the difficulty of extracting digital evidence in such crimes, computer and information technology specialists find that cybercrime poses a major challenge to computer forensics experts (Biasiotti et al. 2018). The authenticity of electronic evidence in forensic evidence is examined from two perspectives. The first issue is the definition of electronic evidence and its legitimacy. The first requirement is the definition of electronic evidence. The second requirement relates to the legality of electronic evidence and the conditions for its verification. The second issue is the authenticity of electronic evidence in the evidence resulting from the inspection. The first requirement relates to the difficulties in accepting electronic evidence arising from judicial inspection. The second requirement examines trends in the UAE`s legal systems to validate the authenticity of electronic evidence in court.

Electronic evidence has characteristics that distinguish it from other traditional forensic evidence, and the most important are: Electronic evidence is scientific (Biasiotti et al. 2018). Scientific evidence is the result of practical experiments with the scientific method. It is used to provide valid data and facts presented to prove or deny crimes, which requires the use of scientific data and high-quality data from technicians to ensure that the evidence is accurate (Mason and Seng 2017). Therefore, what applies to scientific evidence also applies to electronic evidence. Any type of evidence is examined as to its validity. It is an implementation of the rule that the law seeks justice or knowledge of truth; Electronic evidence presented to the court should be based on scientific logic and its validity should not be questioned (Al-Hamdani and Al-Mousawi 2016; Golubtsov, 2019). Cybercrime is one of the most serious criminal activities today; They threaten the progress made by the world through the use of the Internet in all areas of life and weaken confidence in its use as a fast, simple and secure tool. It can be difficult to prove when a cybercrime is committed, making it difficult for investigators to find evidence to prove the crime and convict its perpetrators. This research examines the authenticity of forensic electronic evidence in criminal cases (Wu and Zheng, 2020). This means that the law does not require the judge to have evidence of the facts or data that the electronic evidence collects (except in the case of public electronic documents).

In addition, the ECPA restricts the manner in which electronic monitoring can be performed. Another federal law that regulates electronic evidence is the Patriot Act, which expands law enforcement powers to collect electronic evidence. Specialists may encounter further difficulties in collecting evidence and after confirming their legitimacy and the legality of the procurement procedure. These challenges are largely due to the technical nature of electronic data and interference with evidence. Non-specialists are not always able to detect manipulations that affect the validity of electronic data to the degree of security, and their use as forensic evidence to establish facts and obtain a conviction or innocence. Among the most important of these challenges are the following: Modern research on e-discovery issues in forensic and criminal proceedings addresses issues such as the preservation of digital evidence and its admissibility in court (Bilal 1994; Granja and Rafael, 2017), legal aspects of electronic evidence, and legal-technical compliance issues (Losavio et al., 2019; Schloss 1976), the role of electronic evidence in the detection and investigation of cybercrime (Matchanov 2020), the classification and evaluation of digital forensic tools (Parveen et al. 2020), opportunities and challenges for electronic evidence (Biasiotti et al. 2018), and issues and prospects for the legal regulation of e-evidence issues related to the use of blockchain technologies (Wu and Zheng 2020). This study examines the legality of electronic evidence and the conditions for its examination, the degree of authenticity of electronic evidence found during an investigation, the difficulties in obtaining electronic evidence that can be presented in court, and the degree of freedom of a presiding judge to decide whether electronic material presented to the court should be used as evidence. Until now, there has been no affordable method to prove the authenticity of electronic evidence. LifeHash solves this problem by linking your electronic data to your profile, which is then immutably (forever) anchored to the blockchain.

The LifeHash mobile app is free to download and use. Freemium users get a limited version of the app that gives the average user enough features to back up your most important data! All electronic data can be used as evidence as long as it proves something. The list is endless and may include: The following types of evidence are not admissible against a criminal accused: Research shows that investigations often focus on the workplace, home or home of the accused`s family and friends. The search authorization must be indicated in the inspection permit, which must include the place to be searched. The inspection process in the electronic system may provide evidence related to the infringement, such as magnetic tapes, information stored in the computer and optical media. Obtaining evidence from information technology systems presents many challenges for investigators for several reasons (Biasiotti et al. 2018). Electronic aids may be used to commit criminal offences; They are therefore proof of these crimes.

In addition, it is easy to quickly delete or manipulate digital evidence. Before the widespread introduction of digital technologies, forensic tactics, techniques and methods were based on earlier developments based on the study of the material world.