Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The increasing reliance on digital technologies in the commission and investigation of crime has made digital evidence integral to contemporary criminal proceedings, while raising complex questions concerning its admissibility, reliability, and compatibility with fair-trial guarantees. This study examines the adequacy of the legal regulation of digital evidence in criminal proceedings and the extent to which it reconciles effective criminal investigation with the protection of fundamental rights. Employing descriptive-analytical, comparative, and inductive approaches, it analyses the legal nature of digital evidence, the procedures governing its collection, seizure, preservation, and examination, and the principles guiding its judicial assessment. The study considers selected Arab and international legal frameworks, with particular attention to the United Arab Emirates, and addresses the challenges of obtaining electronic data across national borders. The findings indicate that contemporary legal systems increasingly recognise digital evidence as a legitimate means of criminal proof. The principal challenge lies not in recognition alone, but in safeguarding the legality, integrity, and verifiability of such evidence throughout its lifecycle. A documented chain of custody and competent forensic examination are central to establishing reliability, while the ultimate assessment of probative value remains within the discretion of the criminal court. The study therefore recommends clearer procedural rules specifically tailored to digital evidence, standardised custody and preservation practices, professional standards for forensic expertise, and stronger mechanisms for international judicial cooperation. It concludes that an effective legal framework must integrate technical safeguards with procedural protections to strengthen criminal justice without undermining privacy, defence rights, or the fairness of proceedings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aadel Abdulla Ali Alyammahi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: