Legal basis

The Supreme People's Court on Several Provisions on Evidence in Civil Litigation, which will come into force on May 1, 2020, has added a new provision on electronic evidence:

Article XIV Electronic data includes the following information, electronic documents:

(1) information published by online platforms such as web pages, blogs, and micro blogs

(2) communication information of network application services such as cell phone text messages, emails, instant messaging, communication groups and other communication information;

(3) information such as user registration information, identity authentication information, electronic transaction records, communication records, log-in logs and other information;

(4) electronic files such as documents, pictures, audio, video, digital certificates, computer programs and other electronic files;

(5) other digitalized information such as electronic documents, audio, video, digital certificates, computer programs and other electronic files;

Article 14: Electronic Data p>(v) other information stored, processed and transmitted in digital form that can prove the facts of the case.

This means that the use of electronic data in civil litigation cases will be further popularized. What we call electronic evidence is actually a kind of electronic data. In 2012, when the Civil Procedure Law was revised, there were relevant new provisions, which is obviously a rule that was born with the development of the times.

With the widespread popularity of e-commerce, civil litigation cases involving electronic data as evidence has long been commonplace. China's early litigation involving electronic data, the authenticity of electronic data need to be notarized as evidence to be admitted by the court, otherwise it is likely that the technical reasons can not determine the authenticity of the non-admissible. With the paperless office, big data update iteration, more and more of the electronic evidence is no longer required to notarization as a prerequisite for the admissibility. In the conditions of the case, the court demonstration can also be accepted. Of course, not everyone has a strong technical background, can instantly recognize the authenticity of electronic data, electronic data is altered is also very easy to occur, electronic evidence is admissible must be combined with individual cases, comprehensive judgment.

How to recognize the difference between electronic data and traditional documentary evidence?

The Supreme Court in the "new civil litigation evidence provisions of the understanding and application of" the book summarizes the four characteristics of electronic data:

1, technical dependence

Electronic data generation, storage and transmission must rely on modern electronic technology equipment and technical means to achieve.

2, storage and transmission of hidden

Electronic data stored in the medium, the senses can not be felt directly, only through specialized equipment and technical conditions to be viewed.

3, easy to fabricate

Where electronic data can always be tampered with, destroyed, and some may be able to do without leaving a trace.

4, can be restored

Relative to the traditional documentary evidence of the destruction of the original can not be restored to the situation, there is the possibility of repair of electronic data.

Is electronic evidence out of a certain help?

Not necessarily!

In practice, many parties believe that the evidence on hand, but the results are often lost to the unknown.

Electronic evidence, since it is evidence, then also to apply the rules of evidence, after the court hearing to determine the truth may be admissible, and ultimately affect the outcome of the case. Want to make electronic evidence to help the case, but also need to bear in mind the following points (after all, the emergency moment of evidence is not necessarily in time to consult a legal professional):

1, the identification of the parties

Whether it is QQ, microblogging, microblogging, B station Up masters, shaking voice? Any information, when we express our opinion on its content, the first thing we need to do is to identify the subject of the published information. Can't put what that person did on this person, that's a plant. You have to have an object to claim, right? The object is not clear, the court will not even accept the case.

How to recognize the identity of the subject of these information publishers? This is a technical job. Some good, like cell phone numbers, Alipay all real-name authentication, microblogging V authentication, electronic signatures, a check can be known. Some, such as WeChat, although most of them have been real-name authentication, but there are still a small number of not bound to the ID card, can not check the identity. If in the chat record, through the context of the original reflection of the matter is naturally good, such as can not reveal the name of the inquiry, phone, address is better, if necessary, asked to give the documents to take a picture is not impossible.

2, the content of the complete

Some people think they are important QQ, WeChat or Taobao Wang Wang Wang part of the chat content screenshot, as evidence, I have to say that is really big heart. The court hearing is not the same as a child's play, logic is the basic requirements. Assuming that one party is at fault, the content of the chat record should be able to reflect the fault, rather than each other, arguing or no head, can not be associated. Interaction is more effective as opposed to unilateral reminders. Let's not forget that our judges have discretion, and when it happens that there is ambiguity in the content, especially when people say you took it out of context, you may regret why you didn't chat more in the first place.

3, the original submission and in-court demonstration

Electronic evidence is also evidence, in accordance with the provisions of the evidence in the trial in addition to providing a printed paper version of the chat logs, microblogging, text messaging; disk storage of video, audio, or the need to submit the original.

What is the original electronic evidence?

The original cell phone text message is that message in the phone; WeChat chat record is to open the WeChat app can be viewed after the record rather than a screenshot; e-mail is to log in to the web page to open the electronic mailbox can be flipped to the email; audio recording must also be the device that you pressed the record button at the time? After submitting the original, you still have to demonstrate it in court, and the other party will be able to cross-examine it before it can be used as evidence.

Of course, sometimes deliberately deleted electronic evidence or electronic equipment suffered damage, although the means of technical recovery can be taken to restore data, but after all, there is uncertainty, in case of irrecoverable losses. At this point, the first time through the third-party technical means to retain electronic evidence is a good choice.

Conclusion

In short, "the evidence must be verified to be true, in order to serve as a basis for determining the facts".