电子数据证据认定问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-23 02:19

本文选题：电子数据证据 + 脆弱性　；参考：《沈阳师范大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国最新颁布实施的《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》中第四十八条第一次将“电子数据”纳入法定证据种类之中，和视听资料证据共同被列为第八种刑事诉讼证据。这一举措也是我国第一次在立法的角度将独立的法律地位赋予给了“电子数据”证据，，使之与传统类型证据具有相同的法律地位。至此，电子数据证据的法律地位从立法上得到根本的确认。但是由于电子数据证据在法律上的地位确立较晚，所以我国关于电子数据证据的可采性认定以及证明力认定问题的研究尚处于初级阶段，本文将以新刑事诉讼法证据规定修改为契机，深入探讨电子数据证据的内涵特点，以及在其法律归属充分探讨的基础上，着重在电子数据证据的可采性认定以及证明力认定问题方面进行深入的探索，力求对我国未来的电子数据证据法律规范的构建有所裨益。电子数据证据的具有广义和狭义两种含义，狭义上的电子数据证据，它仅指借助计算机手段生成和读取的电子信息，又可称为数字化证据。另一种是广义上的电子数据证据，那些各种经由电子学方法、光学方法或者其他方法生成、运输、传递或者存储的信息电文数据均包含在电子数据证据的范围内。电子数据证据作为新型的证据类型，不仅具有传统证据所具有的特点，还具有依赖性、隐蔽性、脆弱性、开放性、共享性等独有的特点。电子数据证据具有可采性，从客观性、关联性和合法性三个方面加以认定。对电子数据证据证明力的认定从证明力高低认定以及证据完整性认定。在电子数据证据证明力高低认定中，要充分重视经公证的电子数据证据的证明力认定问题，尤其是最近开始起步流行的网络公证制度，这是传统的公证制度与电子数据证据相结合的产物，在司法实践中尚未形成完善的制度流程，需要在实践操作中不断地完整。电子数据证据作为一种新型的证据类型，在还原案件事实、定纷止争上起到了越来越多的作用。在新刑诉法上将其确立为独立的证据类型，是对其法律地位的认可，但因为在新刑诉法中电子数据证据与视听资料证据并列为第八种电子数据证据，所以其法律地位还没有真正的独立。电子数据证据的发展适用空间是巨大的，要建立完善的电子数据证据适用法律法规体系，让电子数据证据在实践中更好的为我们服务，还原案件事实真相，做到真正的公平正义，维护当事人的合法权益不受侵害。
[Abstract]:Article 48 of the newly promulgated and implemented Criminal procedure Law of the people's Republic of China for the first time includes "electronic data" in the category of legal evidence, and together with audio-visual evidence, it is listed as the eighth kind of evidence in criminal proceedings. This measure is also the first time that our country has given independent legal status to "electronic data" evidence from the angle of legislation, making it have the same legal status as the traditional type of evidence. So far, the legal status of electronic data evidence has been fundamentally confirmed in legislation. However, due to the late establishment of the legal status of electronic data evidence, the research on the admissibility and proof of electronic data evidence in China is still in the primary stage. This article will take the new criminal procedure law evidence stipulation revision as the opportunity, deeply discusses the electronic data evidence connotation characteristic, and in its legal attribution thorough discussion foundation, This paper focuses on the identification of admissibility of electronic data evidence and the identification of proof power in order to be helpful to the construction of legal norms of electronic data evidence in China in the future. Electronic data evidence has two meanings: broad sense and narrow sense. In narrow sense, electronic data evidence refers only to electronic information generated and read by computer means, and can also be called digital evidence. The other is electronic data evidence in a broad sense. All kinds of information message data generated, transported, transmitted or stored by electronic, optical or other methods are included in the scope of electronic data evidence. As a new type of evidence, electronic data evidence not only has the characteristics of traditional evidence, but also has the unique characteristics of dependence, concealment, vulnerability, openness and sharing. Electronic data evidence is admissible, which is determined from three aspects: objectivity, relevance and legality. The confirmation of proof power of electronic data evidence is from the level of proof power and the confirmation of evidence integrality. In the determination of the proof power of the electronic data evidence, we should pay full attention to the problem of the proof power of the notarized electronic data evidence, especially the network notarization system, which has recently begun to become popular. This is the result of the combination of the traditional notarization system and the electronic data evidence. It has not formed a perfect system process in the judicial practice, and needs to be integrated continuously in the practice operation. As a new type of evidence, electronic data evidence plays a more and more important role in reducing the facts of cases. Establishing it as an independent type of evidence in the new criminal procedure law is the recognition of its legal status, but in the new criminal procedure law, electronic data evidence and audio-visual data evidence are the eighth kind of electronic data evidence. So its legal status has not been truly independent. The development and application of electronic data evidence is huge. It is necessary to establish a perfect system of laws and regulations for electronic data evidence, so that electronic data evidence can serve us better in practice and restore the truth of the case. To achieve true fairness and justice, to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the parties are not infringed.
【学位授予单位】：沈阳师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.23

【参考文献】