电子数据证据保全问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-26 07:57

本文选题：电子数据证据 + 保全　；参考：《安徽大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着互联网络信息技术的快速发展,电子商务、电子政务以及无纸化办公等领域也在不断发展壮大。电子数据证据在这些领域的快速发展所产生的民事纠纷中逐渐显露头角,并且逐渐称为我国证据制度中不可小觑的重要组成部分。在司法实践中,诸多民商事纠纷的解决均涉及到了电子数据证据的应用,电子数据证据已成为法官或律师等诉讼参与人员分析和证明案件事实的重要依据。基于民商事诉讼模式向当事人主义的转变,法院一般不主动为认定案件事实搜集相关证据。而由于当事人在涉及电子数据证据案件中收集证据的有限能力,往往在纠纷发生后不得不放弃对自身合法权益的救济。在当事人面对此种情况时,证据保全制度是其在诉讼活动中维护自身合法权益的唯一途径。电子数据证据在保全方式、保全范围、保全时间以及保全主体的技术性方面都与传统证据保全有着较大的区别,而这一区别以及特征正是探求电子数据证据保全制度的价值所在,体现电子数据证据保全的必要性和意义。我国于2013年正式确立了电子数据证据的法律地位,结束了电子数据证据多年的地位纷争。但此次解决的问题也仅限于电子数据证据的法律地位问题,并未涉及到收集、保全等问题,电子数据证据在司法实践中的适用需沿用传统证据保全的相关程序及规定。虽然电子数据证据保全依然属于证据保全的范畴,沿用传统证据的保全体制无可厚非。但基于电子数据证据的特征必然使得传统证据保全的具体操作无法满足电子数据证据的保全需求,而这一问题主要体现在保全主体在人员专业技术能力上的不过关,保全手段和保全时间与电子数据证据保全需求的不完全匹配,获取和保管电子数据信息的软件及计算机技术的不成熟以及缺乏行业制度及标准等方面。电子数据证据保全是科技与法律的有机结合,完善电子数据证据保全体制不仅需要在技术层面加大证据获取和保全的软硬件研究,制定证据获取和保全的流程,确立指导性原则。在司法实践方面对证据保全主体的范围,人员的专业技术能力等具体问题提出针对性的解决措施,还需要在法律层面上为电子数据证据保全确立保全条件、真实性及证明力的评判标准等法律制度的规范性保障。因此,总体来说我国的电子数据证据保全体制并不完善,电子数据证据的立法现状并不能满足司法实践的需求,无法有效发挥电子数据证据应有的证明力。在此时对电子数据证据保全在司法实践和立法层面所遇到的问题加以研究颇具有现实意义。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of Internet information technology, e-commerce, e-government and paperless office are also growing. Electronic data evidence has been gradually revealed in the civil disputes arising from the rapid development of these fields, and has gradually become an important part of the evidence system in our country. In judicial practice, the settlement of many civil and commercial disputes involves the application of electronic data evidence, which has become an important basis for judges or lawyers to analyze and prove the facts of the case. Based on the transformation of civil and commercial litigation mode to litigant doctrine, courts generally do not actively collect relevant evidence for the determination of the facts of a case. But because of the limited ability of the parties to collect evidence in the case involving electronic data evidence, they often have to give up the remedy to their legitimate rights and interests after the dispute. In the face of this situation, evidence preservation system is the only way to protect their legitimate rights and interests in litigation activities. Electronic data evidence is quite different from traditional evidence preservation in terms of preservation mode, preservation scope, preservation time and technical aspects of preservation subject. This difference and characteristic is the value of the electronic data evidence preservation system and reflects the necessity and significance of electronic data evidence preservation. China formally established the legal status of electronic data evidence in 2013, ending the status dispute of electronic data evidence for many years. However, this problem is only limited to the legal status of electronic data evidence, and does not involve the collection, preservation and other issues. The application of electronic data evidence in judicial practice should follow the relevant procedures and regulations of traditional evidence preservation. Although electronic data evidence preservation still belongs to the category of evidence preservation, there is no problem with the traditional evidence preservation system. However, based on the characteristics of electronic data evidence, the specific operation of traditional evidence preservation cannot meet the requirements of electronic data evidence preservation, and this problem is mainly reflected in the professional and technical ability of personnel. The preservation means and the preservation time are not fully matched with the requirements of electronic data evidence preservation, the immature software and computer technology for obtaining and keeping electronic data information, and the lack of industry system and standards, etc. Electronic data evidence preservation is an organic combination of science and technology and law. To improve the electronic data evidence preservation system, we should not only increase the research on the hardware and software of evidence acquisition and preservation at the technical level, but also establish the process of obtaining and preserving evidence. Establish guiding principles. In the aspect of judicial practice, the scope of the main body of evidence preservation, the professional and technical ability of personnel and other specific problems should be solved, and the preservation conditions should be established at the legal level for the preservation of electronic data evidence. The normative guarantee of the legal system such as the criterion of authenticity and the power of proof. Therefore, on the whole, the electronic data evidence preservation system in our country is not perfect, the current legislation of electronic data evidence can not meet the needs of judicial practice, and can not effectively give full play to the necessary proof power of electronic data evidence. At this time, it is of practical significance to study the problems encountered in the judicial practice and legislation of electronic data evidence preservation.
【学位授予单位】：安徽大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D925

【相似文献】