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 the three systems of 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 study of authoritative jurisprudential and legal sources, as well as relevant statutes and regulations, and were analyzed using the content analysis technique. The findings indicate that in Imami jurisprudence, electronic evidence is admissible provided that its authenticity and protection against forgery and alteration are established, and such evidence may lead to the judge’s personal conviction. In Iranian law, the Electronic Commerce Law of 2003 and the Executive Regulation on the Admissibility of Electronic Evidence of 2013 have formally recognized electronic evidence and classified it among the means of proof in litigation. In French law, the Law of March 13, 2000, by establishing equality 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 evidentiary value between the 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, has presented a more coherent framework. Iranian law, by drawing upon the capacities of Imami jurisprudence and the experience of French law, can further develop its system of electronic evidence.