Abstract

Digital reality has firmly entered the life of society and the state. It has also become a solid medium and a means of committing crimes, the digital (electronic) traces of which law enforcement and judicial authorities use to restore the picture of the event. Various digital devices (mobile phones, tablets, smartphones, flash drives, hard drives, etc.), carrying important information for the preliminary investigation and the court, fall into the orbit of the criminal process. It is often impossible to withdraw, investigate, consolidate this information without the participation of a specialist. The current criminal procedure legislation is not fully adapted to such sources of information. Therefore, digital novels of reality become the object of study of many sciences of the criminal law cycle, including the science of criminal procedure law. Is it necessary to include the concept of «electronic evidence» in the criminal procedure legislation? If necessary, are there grounds for concluding that this type of evidence is independent, or can electronic evidence be classified as one of the traditional types of evidence? What are the theoretical and practical prerequisites for this? What are the features of electronic evidence? In science, there are different points of view on these issues. Most scientists and experts believe it is possible to classify electronic evidence as either physical evidence or other documents. In the paper, it is offered to consider these evidence as an independent type of evidence, treating them as electronic carriers of information, and electronic information in the form of electronic documents. Based on the proposed theoretical proposals, it is necessary to begin the development of appropriate legal norms for their inclusion in the criminal procedure law.

Highlights

  • Digital reality has firmly entered the life of society and the state

  • It has become a solid medium and a means of committing crimes, the digital traces of which law enforcement and judicial authorities use to restore the picture of the event

  • Various digital devices

Read more

Summary

Introduction

В статье предлагается рассматривать данные доказательства как самостоятельный вид доказательств, относя к ним как электронные носители информации, так и саму электронную информацию в форме электронных документов. С. Пастухова, в УПК РФ не следует вводить новый вид доказательства («электронное доказательство») или новый источник («электронный носитель информации»), необходимо лишь уточнить понятие «доказательство», указав, что сведения могут быть в виде электронной информации, которая, в свою очередь, «вполне способна восприниматься в одном из традиционных доказательств — вещественном доказательстве или документе»4.

Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.