A Comparative Study of the Status of Electronic Evidence in the Proof of Claims in Imami Jurisprudence, Iranian Law, and French Law

Abstract

The present study was conducted with the aim of comparatively examining the status of electronic evidence in the proof of claims within three systems: Imami jurisprudence, Iranian law, and French law. This research is qualitative in nature and was carried out using a descriptive-analytical method with a comparative approach. Data were collected through the review of authoritative jurisprudential and legal sources as well as relevant legislation, and were analyzed using the content analysis technique. The findings indicate that in Imami jurisprudence, electronic evidence is admissible provided that its reliability and security against forgery and alteration are established, and it may lead to the judge’s knowledge. In Iranian law, the Electronic Commerce Act (enacted in 2003) and the Regulation on the Admissibility of Electronic Evidence (enacted in 2013) have recognized electronic evidence and included it among the means of proof. In French law, the Act of March 13, 2000, by establishing equivalence between electronic and paper writings, introduced a fundamental transformation in the law of evidence, and Articles 1365 to 1367 of the French Civil Code now recognize the principle of equal probative value of these two forms. The results of the study demonstrate that all three legal systems have moved toward the acceptance of electronic evidence; however, French law, through explicit legislative provisions and a distinction between electronic evidence in juridical acts and juridical facts, offers a more coherent system. Iranian law, by drawing on the capacities of Imami jurisprudence and the experience of French law, can further develop its system of electronic evidence.