The Judge’s Authority to Assess the Authenticity of Digital Evidence

Abstract

The research deals with the subject of the judge’s authority in assessing the authenticity of digital evidence. This study aims to highlight the controls on the judge’s authority in assessing the authenticity of digital evidence, and to explain the limits of the judge’s authority in assessing the authenticity of digital evidence, and to contribute to improving judicial work in the courts of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The researcher relied on induction of the resources of the topic as well as analysis. The researcher reached the following results: First: discretionary authority is defined with definitions that are close in meaning and revolves around considering and deliberating to clarify what is meant by the text in order to arrive at a ruling. Second: digital evidence is completely different from traditional evidence in terms of nature, as its dynamic nature transcends places and borders. Third: digital evidence is one of the means of proof arising in this era and it has the weight of traditional writing. Fourth: evaluating digital evidence goes through two stages: the first is a technical stage in which the evidence is verified and safe from tampering, and this is the job of a specialized expert; the second is the stage of the digital evidence’s substantiation and confirmation of the incident, and this is a judge’s job. Fifth: the Saudi system agrees with Islamic jurisprudence in accepting digital evidence and using it as evidence.