论电子数据运用中的问题与对策

发布时间：2019-06-18 10:02

【摘要】：2013年新修改的民事诉讼法将电子数据列为一种独立的证据，从而给在司法实践中早已存在并应用多年的电子数据以“正名”。然而，立法并没有解决电子数据在我国民事诉讼中运用中的很多实际问题，例如真实性、合法性审查——即电子数据证明力的判断问题。民事诉讼法第69条规定：经法定程序公证证明的法律事实和文书，人民法院应当作为认定事实的依据，此条规定直接赋予了经公证证据的证明力，，也因此成为弥补法律规定电子数据运用空白的最佳方案。实际上，公证保全电子数据并非万全之策，而只能作为现阶段相关证据立法缺失的权宜之计。想要发挥电子数据的证明能力，保障其在新时代司法证明中“证据之王”的地位，立法才是应对现阶段电子数据运用困境的根本之策。本文共分四章。第一章为电子数据的概述，首先通过将电子数据与其他几种较为容易混淆的证据概念相比较，归纳并总结电子数据具有无形性、客观性、可修改与可破坏性等专属特点；其次，回顾了我国在电子数据方面的相关立法进程。立法从基本否定电子数据到有限承认其证据资格再到如今的实际承认，一方面显示出法律的完善与进步，但同时我国在电子数据方面的法律规定尚未形成一套完备系统，此外具体可采性规则的缺乏也是影响电子数据证明力的重要障碍。第二章阐述了电子数据在运用中的具体问题。问题主要集中在两个方面，一方面电子数据的出现对传统证据理论提出了挑战，例如证据原件规则与传闻证据规则；另一方面是电子数据在实践中存在过于依赖公证保全的问题，而公证保全电子数据无论是对法院、当事人或公证机构本身皆有不足之处。对于公证机构本身而言，电子数据的保全仍然缺少完整的可执行性规范；对于法院而言，鉴于电子数据的技术性特征，公证保全无法保障其真实性；对于当事人而言，诉讼中动辄需要公证保全的电子数据既不经济又效率低下。第三章主要考察了国外在电子数据方面的先进立法。通过对比介绍英国、美国、法国、日本法律对于电子数据的相关规定，归纳出英美法系国家在电子数据立法方面的共同态度及各自特点，最后总结国外先进立法对我国未来完善电子数据相关法律的启示与指导。最后一章在介绍国外电子数据先进立法的基础上，提出了完善我国相关制度的构想。首先我们应当意识并接受电子数据的时代性特征，要想在司法实践中能更好的运用电子数据，厘清其内涵与外延乃是基础；其次，电子数据的出现使人们不仅要重新定义证据的概念，也给传统法律规则提出了诸多挑战。传统证据规则中关于原件、最佳证据等的规定也需得到相应完善与发展；最后，建立一套审查判断电子数据的标准。
[Abstract]:The newly amended Code of Civil procedure in 2013 included electronic data as an independent evidence, giving the electronic data that had been in judicial practice for many years a "correct name." However, the legislation has not solved many practical problems in the application of electronic data in civil litigation in our country, such as authenticity and legality review, that is, the judgment of the probative power of electronic data. Article 69 of the Civil procedure Law stipulates that the people's court shall serve as the basis for determining the facts of legal facts and documents certified by legal procedure notarization. This provision directly gives the proof power of notarized evidence, and thus becomes the best scheme to make up for the gaps in the use of electronic data stipulated by law. In fact, notarization preservation of electronic data is not a comprehensive policy, but can only be used as an expedient measure for the lack of relevant evidence legislation at this stage. In order to give full play to the proof ability of electronic data and ensure its position as "king of evidence" in judicial proof in the new era, legislation is the fundamental way to deal with the dilemma of the application of electronic data at the present stage. This paper is divided into four chapters. The first chapter is an overview of electronic data. First of all, by comparing electronic data with several other confusing concepts of evidence, this paper sums up and summarizes the exclusive characteristics of electronic data, such as invisibility, objectivity, modifiable and destructive, etc.; secondly, it reviews the relevant legislative process of electronic data in our country. From the basic negation of electronic data to the limited recognition of its evidentiary qualification to the present practical recognition, on the one hand, it shows the perfection and progress of the law, but at the same time, the legal provisions on electronic data in our country have not yet formed a set of complete systems. in addition, the lack of specific acceptability rules is also an important obstacle to the proof power of electronic data. The second chapter expounds the specific problems in the application of electronic data. The problem mainly focuses on two aspects. On the one hand, the emergence of electronic data challenges the traditional evidence theory, such as the rules of original evidence and hearsay evidence; on the other hand, there is a problem that electronic data rely too much on notarization preservation in practice, and the preservation of electronic data by notarization has shortcomings in both the court, the parties and the notarized institution itself. For the notary institution itself, the preservation of electronic data is still lack of complete enforceability norms; for the court, due to the technical characteristics of electronic data, notarization preservation can not guarantee its authenticity; for the parties, the electronic data that often need notarization preservation in litigation is neither economical nor inefficient. The third chapter mainly examines the advanced legislation in electronic data abroad. By comparing the relevant provisions of British, American, French and Japanese laws on electronic data, this paper sums up the common attitude and characteristics of common law countries in electronic data legislation, and finally summarizes the enlightenment and guidance of foreign advanced legislation to the improvement of electronic data related laws in China in the future. The last chapter, on the basis of introducing the advanced legislation of foreign electronic data, puts forward the idea of perfecting the relevant system of our country. First of all, we should be aware of and accept the characteristics of the times of electronic data, in order to make better use of electronic data in judicial practice, clarify its connotation and extension is the basis; secondly, the emergence of electronic data makes people not only have to redefine the concept of evidence, but also pose many challenges to traditional legal rules. The provisions of the traditional rules of evidence on the original and the best evidence need to be improved and developed accordingly. Finally, a set of standards for examining and judging electronic data is established.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.13

【参考文献】