Electronic Evidence in the Theory of Judicial Evidence

Despite the significant number of works devoted to electronic evidence, both in Russian and foreign legal doctrine, there continues to be keen interest in this topic. In Russian civil procedural law, problems are identified as arising in judicial practice when using electronic evidence. Many scientists and practitioners draw attention to the need to supplement procedural codes with separate articles devoted to electronic evidence — in particular, the procedure for obtaining it by the court. The present study considers whether errors encountered in judicial practice can be traced to in sufficient regulation governing the use of electronic evidence. In essence, this concerns whether electronic evidence has essential differences with other means of proof that need to be reflected in the law by supplementing procedural codes with relevant provisions. Based on general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison, comparison) and private law methods (formal-legal), special attention in the work is paid to the study of Russian procedural legislation and existing scientific positions in the theory of judicial proof along with proposals for improving procedural legislation in this area. As well as analyzing the main approaches to the concept of electronic evidence existing in science, the work specifies the attributes of electronic evidence, considers the position of electronic evidence in the system of judicial evidence, and identifies a need to supplement procedural codes with separate rules on electronic evidence. The study affirms the correctness of the position according to which electronic evidence should not be considered as a separate means of proof. This conclusion is based on the study of the theory of judicial proof, in which the method of its examination (or obtaining evidence) by the court is determined as a feature of each individual piece of evidence. Since electronic evidence demonstrates no specificity in this respect and based on the study of existing proposals in the scientific literature for improving procedural legislation, it is concluded that procedural codes do not need to be supplemented with separate articles on electronic evidence. Thus, the procedure for handling electronic evidence is subject to the general provisions of the law on judicial evidence (rules for the request, disclosure, provision, examination, and evaluation of evidence), taking into account the existing clarifications for written evidence.