The practice of excluding illegally obtained electronic evidence and the institutional construction
In criminal proceedings,digital rights are increasingly becoming an indispensable rights for criminal suspects,while the exclusionary rule for illegally obtained evidence always serves as a crucial procedural remedy.In practice,judges often fail to exclude illegally obtained electronic evidence for reasons as follows:the exclusionary rule lacks authority,the requirement of supplementary approval is met,and the authenticity is supplemented by legality.This issue arises from several institutional factors.Firstly,the rules for assessing the legality of electronic evidence essentially involve a complex interplay between authenticity and legal rules.Secondly,electronic evidence collection measures are not well integrated with traditional investigative methods.Thirdly,The rules for excluding electronic evidence and the rules for rectifying electronic evidence defects are mainly about excluding data when its authenticity is in question.Only in rare cases,the exclusion of electronic evidence is often based on that admitting such data would undermine the judicial integrity by obvious errors rather than by serious procedural violations.Electronic evidence embodies the fundamental rights such as property rights,right to privacy,and the right to communication secrecy.Illegally collecting evidence may thus encroach on citizens'basic rights.Therefore,it is essential to adopt digital rights as a concept in evidence review.We need to differentiate the legal nature of electronic evidence forensic collection measures,clarify the right-relief attributes of exclusionary rules for illegally obtained electronic evidence,and construct a comprehensive exclusionary framework for such data.
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
