Ensuring Admissibility of Electronic Evidence in Criminal Proceedings

The paper substantiates the need to clarify existing definitions of "electronic evidence" in criminal procedure science. Content analysis of scholarly literature reveals types and classifications of admissibility criteria for electronic evidence. Through a systematic analysis of criminal procedure legislation, legal positions of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, a study of criminal procedure practice, an empirical study conducted by the author in 2024-2025 in 12 constituent entities of the Russian Federation, and foreign experience in using electronic evidence in criminal procedure proving, additional criteria for the admissibility of electronic criminal procedure evidence have been updated based on their digital origin and scope of existence. The author proposes a definition of electronic evidence in criminal proceedings, and systematizes the criteria for its admissibility in order to optimize criminal procedural practice.

1. Voronin M. I. Nedopustimaya dopustimost elektronnykh dokazatelstv. Sudebnaya praktika i probely v UPK // Ugolovnyy protsess. — 2020. — № 10. — S. 46–55.

2. Zuev S. V. O sovremennoy kontseptsii razvitiya informatsionnykh tekhnologiy v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve (RITVUS) // Permskiy yuridicheskiy almanakh. — 2019. — № 2. — S. 618–629.

3. Kipnis N. M. Dopustimost dokazatelstv v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve / otv. red. P. A. Lupinskaya. — M., 1995. — 128 s.

4. Kolichenko A. A. Dopustimost elektronnykh dokazatelstv v sovremennom ugolovnom protsesse // Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. — 2022. — № 3 (95). — S. 80–85.

5. Malysheva O. A. Transformatsiya dosudebnogo ugolovnogo proizvodstva v usloviyakh tsifrovizatsii: tendentsii i riski // Tendentsii ugolovnoy politiki Rossii na sovremennom etape razvitiya obshchestva: sbornik statey Vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 25-letiyu kafedr ugolovnogo prava i kriminologii, ugolovnogo protsessa i pravookhranitelnoy deyatelnosti. — Izhevsk, 2024. — S. 43–50.

6. Ryabova O. V. Znachenie instituta «elektronnykh dokazatelstv» v otechestvennom ugolovnom sudoproizvod stve // Mirovye issledovaniya v oblasti sotsialno-gumanitarnykh nauk: materialy III Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. — Ryazan, 2023. — S. 374–377.

7. Titova K. A., Litvinova I. V. K voprosu o vozmozhnosti primeneniya sushchestvuyushchikh kriteriev dopustimosti dokazatelstv k elektronnym dokazatelstvam v rossiyskom ugolovnom protsesse // Nauchnyy vestnik Orlovskogo yuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii imeni V.V. Lukyanova. — 2022. — № 2. — S. 144–152.

8. Antwi-Boasiako A., Venter H. A Model for Digital Evidence Admissibility Assessment // 13th IFIP International Conference on Digital Forensics (DigitalForensics), January 2017, Orlando, FL, United States. — Springer, 2017.

9. Goodison S. E., Davis R. C., Jackson B. A. Digital Evidence and the U. S. Criminal Justice System // URL: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR890.html.

10. The Admissibility of Electronic Evidence // URL: https://www.foxmandal.in/the-admissibility-of-electronicevidence/