In China’s current system of rules for the exclusion of illegal evidence, the focus
of adjustment is on the exclusion of illegal verbal evidence and illegal physical
and documentary evidence. Based on the analysis of similar case search, this paper
distills the following rules and legislative proposals: whether electronic data
collected by illegal methods should be excluded, the evidence can be differentiated
into defective evidence and illegal evidence according to the severity of the illegal
methods, and the decision of whether to exclude
it can be made on a case-by-case basis. Defective evidence can becorrected and adopted through legal procedures, but
illegal evidence that cannot be examined to determine its authenticity, or
the time, place and manner of its production or acquisition are in doubt and cannot
provide the necessary proof or reasonable explanation should be excluded.
References
[1]
Chen, R. (2022). Paradigm Reshaping of Electronic Evidence Review Judgment from Hybrid Review to Detached Review. Hebei Jurisprudence, 7, 46-72.
[2]
Chipperius (2009). Methodology of Jurisprudence (Translated by J. B. Jin). Law Press.
[3]
Li, H. et al. (2015). The Perfection of the Rule of excluding Evidence of Illegal Technical Investigation. People’s Procuratorate, 3, 67-69.
[4]
Liang, K. (2020). On the Legal Regulation of Electronic Data Collection in Preliminary Investigation and Discussion with Long Zongzhi and Xie Dengke. Chinese Journal of Criminal Law, 1, 39-57.
[5]
Riekkinen, J. (2019). Electronic Evidence in Criminal Procedure: On the Effects of ICT and the Development towards the Network Society on the Life-Cycle of Evidence. Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review, 16, 6-10. https://doi.org/10.14296/deeslr.v16i0.5014
[6]
Xie, D. (2022). Technical Forensics of Electronic Data. Journal of Legal Studies, 2, 209-224.
[7]
Zhang, H. (2021). Research on the Rules for Reviewing Illegal Electronic Data in Criminal Proceedings. Beijng Juridical Journal, 2, 55-76.
