Digital evidence as a modern means of proof and its impact on shaping judicial convictions

Abstract

This study examines digital evidence and its role in criminal proceedings, particularly in light of the digital revolution and the rapid advancements in this field. The study focuses on a key question: to what extent does this evidence contribute to criminal proceedings, and how does it align with the established legal safeguards provided by the legislator for investigations? This is especially relevant given the issues it raises concerning its legitimacy, legal value, and its inherent technical nature, which makes its handling different from that of traditional methods of proof.

The study's significance lies in its contribution to the legal literature by providing new research in this relatively new field. This will assist the criminal justice system in understanding how to use and obtain this evidence, and contribute to evaluating the adequacy of existing legal texts in addressing this type of evidence.

This research aims to define digital evidence, explain its characteristics, its legitimacy, and its legal value in terms of the judge's ability to rely on it to form a conviction. It also examines the problems posed by digital evidence and how to overcome them legally. This research has yielded several key findings, most notably that digital evidence is one of the most important modern criminal proof methods, representing a qualitative leap in evidentiary procedures. It has contributed to greater accuracy and faster procedures, provided that the technical processes for obtaining and preserving this evidence are handled with precision and integrity. The study concludes that Iraqi legislation must be developed to adequately address digital evidence and encompass all its aspects, ensuring its effectiveness without compromising due process guarantees or the rights of the accused. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the need to establish procedures that guarantee the integrity of digital evidence and strike a balance between the requirements of proof and the protection of individual rights and freedoms.