Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.40 N° 72
Enero
Junio
2022
Recibido el 22/09/2021 Aceptado el 06/12/2021
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 40, Nº 72 (2022), 385-394
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
The use of electronic evidence in court:
a comparative legal analysis
in the world practice
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4072.21
Asgarova Matanat Pasha *
Aliyev Bakhtiyar Abdurakhman Oglu **
Fardin Y. Khalilov ***
Hasanova Ilhama Zakir kizi ****
Abstract
The article is devoted to such a topical issue as the use of
electronic evidence in court. The purpose of the article is to
determine the basic principles of electronic evidence, study
domestic and foreign legislation on the use of electronic evidence
in court, determine their place in the system of evidence, and
identify problems with evidence in court. It was found that
electronic evidence should be understood as factual data that are
displayed in digital forms and recorded on any type of media, as well as after
processing by electronic computers become possible and accessible to human
perception. It has been established that in most of the European countries
we study, electronic evidence is unquestionably classied as written and is
not singled out. It has been identied that electronic documents have the
same legal force in some countries as paper documents. It was concluded
that in Azerbaijan the procedure for collecting and examining electronic
evidence in domestic proceedings should be improved to avoid various
technical errors, as well as to strengthen cybersecurity measures and
increase basic knowledge of judges in the eld of information technology.
Keywords: electronic testing; electronic document; factual data
authenticity of proof; digital justice.
* Associate Professor Ph.D.in Jurisprudence the Academy of Justice of the Ministry of Justice of the
Republic of Azerbaijan H. Zardabi 192, apartment 103, Baku, AZ1011. ORCID ID: https://orcid.
org/0000-0003-1419-9519
** Doctoral student Doctor of Philosophy in Law, Docent the Center for Forensic Expertise Ministry
of Justice of the Republic of Azerbaijan AZ1044 Republic of Azerbaijan, Baku city, Khazar district,
Mardakan settlement, Sergey Yesenin Street. House 92/2, apt.18. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-
0003-0104-4921
*** PhD in law The Justice Academy of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Azerbaijan Chief
Researcher of the Department of Scientic Research and Doctoral Studies AZ1000, Baku city, 158
Vidadi street Republic of Azerbaijan. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5909-8263
**** Head Member of the Bar Association of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the law oce№20 AZ1069 Republic
of Azerbaijan, Baku city, 158, Khan Shushinski Street. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6966-
5495
386
Asgarova Matanat Pasha, Aliyev Bakhtiyar Abdurakhman Oglu, Fardin Y. Khalilov y Hasanova
Ilhama Zakir kizi
The use of electronic evidence in court: a comparative legal analysis in the world practice
El uso de la prueba electrónica en los tribunales: un
análisis jurídico comparativo en la práctica internacional
Resumen
El artículo está dedicado a un tema tan actual como el uso de las pruebas
electrónicas en los tribunales. El propósito del artículo fue determinar los
principios básicos de las pruebas electrónicas, estudiar la legislación sobre
el uso de estas pruebas en los tribunales, determinar su lugar en el sistema
judicial e identicar los problemas comunes. Se ha constatado que la prueba
electrónica debe entenderse como los datos fácticos que se muestran en
formas digitales y se registran en cualquier tipo de soporte, así como
después de que el procesamiento por ordenadores electrónicos sea posible
y accesible a la percepción humana. Se ha establecido que en la mayoría de
los países europeos que estudiamos, las pruebas electrónicas se clasican
indiscutiblemente como escritas y no se singularizan. Se ha identicado
que los documentos electrónicos tienen la misma fuerza legal en algunos
países que los documentos en papel. Se ha llegado a la conclusión de que en
Azerbaiyán debería mejorarse el procedimiento de recogida y examen de las
pruebas electrónicas en los procedimientos nacionales para evitar diversos
errores técnicos, así como para reforzar las medidas de ciberseguridad y
aumentar los conocimientos básicos de los jueces.
Palabras clave: prueba electrónica; documento electrónico; datos
fácticos; autenticidad de la prueba; justicia digital.
Introduction
One of the central issues in modern law is the importance of determining
the reliability of electronic evidence. To identify problems and controversies
in the eld of domestic legislation, it is important to understand and
investigate the practice of using this type of evidence in other countries.
The introduction of electronic evidence into the criminal proceedings
of the Republic of Azerbaijan is a necessary reaction to the digitalization
of the public space: crimes are increasingly committed in the Internet
environment, using gadgets.
Therefore, the realization of comparative legal analysis in other
European countries and highlighting all aspects of this legal phenomenon
should contribute to the improvement of electronic evidence used, the main
purpose of which is to improve the institute of legal proceedings and its
implementation within the framework of law, the vector of which should be
aimed at protecting human rights and freedoms.
387
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 385-394
The eorts of modern jurists are aimed at considering the problems of
reliability of electronic evidence.
The article aims to determine the basic principles of the use of electronic
means of proof, the study of domestic and foreign legislation on the use
of electronic evidence in court proceedings, determining their place in
the system of means of proof, and identication of problems in proving
in court. The object of the study is evidence as a structural component of
judicial proceedings aimed at establishing the circumstances of a civil case.
The subject of study - electronic means of proof in civil proceedings.
The methodological basis of the study consisted of the system-structural
method, which allowed to determine the place of electronic means of proof
in the structure of the institute of proof, and the dogmatic method, which
allowed the interpretation of the relationship between the inner content
and form of the phenomena under study.
1. Results
At present, mankind can observe a signicant leap in the eld of
information technology. The era of the Internet and digitalization began to
dictate its rules in modern society. It is very hard to believe, but if you look
at the legal framework of dierent countries around the world some twenty
or thirty years ago, it will be clear that at that time many norms of behavior
did not exist because of the lack of social needs for that.
Also, in the law there is a dualistic understanding of the legal regulation
- in one case, the electronic medium is material evidence, and in the other
- another document. In turn, in practice, judges recognize as evidence
screenshots of correspondence in a social network, without specifying in
what form this evidence was attached to the materials of the criminal case.
It should be noted that thanks to such information leap in the world,
we can talk about the importance of using certain types of electronic
information, in the sphere of legal relations, i.e., we are talking about
electronic evidence.
It should be noted that such types of evidence dier from other types of
evidence to a certain extent. So, it should be said that electronic evidence is
considered certain texts, photographs, voice or sound recordings, or video
recordings (Vernydubov and Belikova, 2018).
By “electronic evidence should be understood factual data that are
digitally displayed and recorded on any type of medium, and after processing
by electronic computer technology become possible and accessible to
human perception” (Vernydubov and Belikova, 2018: 300).
388
Asgarova Matanat Pasha, Aliyev Bakhtiyar Abdurakhman Oglu, Fardin Y. Khalilov y Hasanova
Ilhama Zakir kizi
The use of electronic evidence in court: a comparative legal analysis in the world practice
To be fair, it should be noted that the phrase “factual data” is also used
by the Russian legislator setting forth the concept of evidence in relation
to proceedings on cases of administrative oenses. In our view, this is the
result of the inuence of the lapsed Soviet legislation, where the concept of
evidence was dened similarly.
The legislator of the Republic of Azerbaijan did a more original thing. In
the denition, which denes the evidence in general, he stated that credible
evidence (information, documents, things) is recognized as such (Article
124 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Azerbaijan Republic). By the way,
this denition is consistent with the concepts of certain types of evidence.
In addition, scholar Hetmantsev (2019) believes that electronic evidence
should be considered as the medium itself, that is, the source of certain
information that has a weighty evidentiary value. We mean the information
available in the form of relevant oral speech, written signs, and so on.
Ibadzade (2016), examines the system of criminal procedural evidence
under the current legislation of the Republic of Azerbaijan, analyzes the
main approaches existing in the doctrine of criminal procedure, denitions
of evidence, describes in detail the features of certain types of criminal
procedural evidence.
It should be noted that nowadays such an important social factor as the
dynamic development of information technologies has greatly inuenced
the very important institute of legal proceedings in the world. A new aspect
in the legal activity of which is the use of electronic evidence in court
proceedings, which leads to the realization of the right to defense of both
natural and legal persons (Vernydubov and Belikova, 2018).
It should be noted that the use of evidence in court proceedings in
electronic form is not considered the newest and modern in foreign
countries. The process of electronic proceedings has relieved justice
agencies from performing unnecessary paperwork and helped to use the
latest technology during the judicial process.
Next, let’s look at the application of evidence in electronic format by the
example of developed countries of the world, such as the United States of
America, as well as European countries like Germany, France, England, as
well as Hungary, and Ukraine.
First, it should be noted that one of the signicant examples of the use
of electronic evidence is considered the experience of the United States of
America (hereinafter - the USA). By the way, the U.S. is considered one of
the leading countries implementing scientic and technological progress. In
addition, the U.S. has a well-developed evidentiary system (Eliseev, 2004).
It is worth mentioning that in fact, the practice of using electronic
evidence had already begun to exist in the states since 1960. At that time, it
389
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 385-394
was associated with electronic computers. In addition, there is a document
(codication act) in the United States called: Federal Rules of Evidence.
This act denes the procedural evidentiary procedure, which specically
states that records and written documents must consist of words or letters,
or handwritten equivalents, as well as typing, photographing, electronic
recording or magnetic pulse, etc. (Code of Criminal Procedure of the
Republic, 2000).
Thus, we can conclude that during the trial electronic evidence
indisputably refers to written evidence and does not distinguish it as a
separate type.
It should be noted that the reliability and admissibility of electronic
evidence is recognized and implemented based on judicial case law specic
to the United States, given that country’s legal system.
It is recognized that in the 1970s, scientic sources, U.S. judges were
asked a question about what exactly concerns the admissibility of evidence.
Thus, subsequently, during court proceedings, it was recognized by
the courts that because information output using electronic computer
technology is perceived by a person audibly or visually, it is considered
that such information is written evidence and must meet the criteria of
admissibility of evidence (Nechyporuk, 2020).
2. Discussion
Thus, due to this approach in understanding electronic evidence, it is
considered that attributing electronic evidence to copies or originals makes
no sense. This approach has greatly simplied the process of establishing
the admissibility of electronic evidence and contributed to achieving the
main goal of US proceedings, i.e., protection of violated rights, freedoms,
and interests of the citizens of this country (Dobie, 1939).
Having analyzed the norms of civil procedure of Germany, it should
be noted that there is no concept of electronic evidence, but the denition
of “electronic document” was enshrined in the Code of Civil Procedure of
Germany, which noted that any data, information contained in electronic
form and content that can be read repeatedly and with the use of written
signs should be referred to electronic documents(Vernydubov and Belikova,
2018).
In particular, the regulation states that:
If preparatory written petitions and attachments thereto, petitions, party
statements, information, data, reports, and third-party declarations are required
to be in writing and are submitted as electronic documents, they must contain
a qualied electronic signature in accordance with the Electronic Signature Act
(Schlotterbeck and Mansinne, 1970: 6).
390
Asgarova Matanat Pasha, Aliyev Bakhtiyar Abdurakhman Oglu, Fardin Y. Khalilov y Hasanova
Ilhama Zakir kizi
The use of electronic evidence in court: a comparative legal analysis in the world practice
The code establishes that there are types of such electronic documents,
namely: public and private electronic documents, and documents that are
executed using electronic mail. The signs of validity are considered to be
that such documents must be contained in documents and private records
set out electronically and have circumstances and qualied electronic
signature set out in a sent message of electronic form with a “De Mail”
account registered by a natural person and registered for a certain person
(Moskovchuk, 2020).
Thus, it should be noted that having analyzed the German Code of Civil
Procedure we can say that the electronic evidence (document) is considered
reliable provided that there is a certain qualied electronic signature.
Compared with German legislation, given the French Republic, namely
the practice of electronic evidence in France, it should be noted here that
such documents are signed and should not be specically linked to certain
technological means due to the fact that electronic documents have the
same legal force as paper documents (Eliseev, 2004).
Thus, the law of the French Republic, namely the Civil Code, establishes
that written evidence should be understood as a certain sequence of symbols,
letters, or other signs endowed with a certain meaning and regardless of
how they are xed and transmitted (Timmerbeil, 2003).
In addition, there is an interesting practice in France regarding the
authenticity of electronic evidence. Such an issue arises if the court doubts
the authenticity of the evidence or if the other party to the process wants
to appeal its authenticity. One of the most common ways to establish
authenticity is considered testimony, which must have some information
that is considered evidence. This method applies to all types of electronic
evidence.
For example, a litigant may submit to the court a photo of a screenshot
from a website that may contain information that conrms or disproves
a certain fact. Then the court, at its discretion, considers whether it is
necessary to conrm the authenticity of such a photo with a screenshot. As
a rule, in practice, it is often enough that the party itself indicates the link to
the site where the information was obtained, and the judge himself checks
its presence on the site (Kazachuk, 2014).
Thus, the French legislator made it clear that here the practice of
evidence does not have a special distinction between paper and electronic
documents, which simplies the judicial process and does not contribute to
delaying cases, which is similar to the same practice of electronic evidence
in the USA.
Regarding the English legislation on electronic evidence the Evidence
in Civil Cases Act 1968 should be mentioned here. According to this Law,
391
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 385-394
the use of the information included in the documents produced by a
computer is considered acceptable for the protection of the legal interests
of the persons. Such a rule existed until 1995. Today, the above-mentioned
issue is regulated by the Civil Evidence Act, which also allows the use of
information processed by electronic computer technology (David, 1973).
Regarding Ukraine, it should be noted that there is a clearly established
notion that electronic evidence should be considered as information in
digital or electronic form which must contain certain data regarding the
circumstances relevant to the case. Such types of evidence include, but are
not limited to, electronic documents such as graphic images, text documents,
photographs, plans, and sound or video recordings. In addition, it should
also include web pages, multimedia, text or voice messages, and databases.
The above information may be stored on servers and portable devices such
as a memory card, cell phone, etc. (Polyshchuk and Kylyvnyk, 2019).
At present, as we noted above, there is no unied approach to the
understanding of electronic “evidence”. On the other hand, we cannot
fail to note a dierent approach to resolving this issue. Thus, the Code of
Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Azerbaijan (Criminal Procedure Code
of the Republic of Azerbaijan, 2000) enshrined the following postulate: the
documents are paper, electronic, and other carriers reected in alphabetic,
numerical, graphic, and other data which may be of importance for
criminal proceedings (Part 1, Article 135 of the Criminal Procedure Code
of the Republic of Azerbaijan). Interesting is the regulation of physical
evidence issue in CPC of Azerbaijan Republic: the documents that have
particularities, foreseen by article 128.1 of CPC of Azerbaijan Republic (Part
135.2 of Article 135 of CPC of Azerbaijan Republic) might also be considered
physical evidence (Criminal Procedure Code of Azerbaijan Republic, 2000).
Analyzing domestic judicial practice, we can conclude about the
ambiguity of deciding questions about the admissibility of such evidence.
Here are a few examples:
1. Most of the courts of the rst instance do not consider printouts
from the Internet, for example:
• The district administrative court of Kyiv did not take into
account the printouts from the articles of the unknown author
of the social network “Facebook”. The court considered that
such information is not evidence.
• The Svyatoshinskiy District Court concluded that the
information on social networks is inadmissible evidence since
their validity cannot be veried.
2. On the other hand, the second part of judges believes that such
evidence should be used at trial, for example:
392
Asgarova Matanat Pasha, Aliyev Bakhtiyar Abdurakhman Oglu, Fardin Y. Khalilov y Hasanova
Ilhama Zakir kizi
The use of electronic evidence in court: a comparative legal analysis in the world practice
• Vinnitsa City Court of Vinnitsa region issued a decision,
according to which were taken and examined printouts of
screenshots from accounts of the network “Facebook”
• and the Novonikolaevsky district court of Zaporizhzhia region
established the fact of hostile relations between two persons
based on photo printouts from a conversation in a social
network (Hetmantsev, 2019).
Vernydubov and Belikova (2018) concluded in their article that the
procedure for collecting and examining electronic evidence in domestic
proceedings should be improved precisely to avoid various technical errors,
as well as to strengthen measures in cybersecurity issues and increase
judges’ basic knowledge of information technology.
Conclusion
Having studied the legal framework of countries such as the United
States, Germany, France, England, and the Republic of Azerbaijan, let us
summarize:
• In the U.S., during a trial, electronic evidence is denitely considered
to be written evidence and is not distinguished as a separate type.
Attributing electronic evidence to copies or originals makes no sense.
This approach has greatly simplied the process of establishing the
admissibility of electronic evidence and has contributed to achieving
the main goal of US proceedings, i.e., protection of violated rights,
freedoms, and interests of the citizens of this country.
• In Germany, electronic evidence (document) is considered reliable
if a certain qualied electronic signature exists.
• In France, electronic documents are signed and do not have to be
specically linked to certain technological means due to the fact that
electronic documents have the same legal force as paper documents.
One of the most common ways to establish authenticity is through
witness testimony, which must have certain information that counts
as evidence. This method is applicable to all types of electronic
evidence. Here the practice of evidence has no particular distinction
between paper and electronic documents, which simplies the
judicial process and does not contribute to delaying cases, which is
similar to the same practice of electronic evidence in the U.S.
• In Ukraine, it can be concluded that there is ambiguity in deciding
on the admissibility of such evidence. The procedure of collection
and examination of electronic evidence in domestic proceedings
393
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 72 (2022): 385-394
should be improved to avoid various technical errors, as well as to
strengthen measures in cybersecurity issues and increase the basic
knowledge of judges in the eld of information technology.
• In the future this issue should be considered from the side of making
additions to the legislative framework of Ukraine, to improve all the
gaps in the question of electronic evidence and the implementation
of the regulatory framework for their admissibility.
Bibliographic References
DAVID, René. 1973. “The Civil Code in France To-day” In: La. L. Rev. Vol. 34,
p. 907-919.
DOBIE, Armistead. 1939. “The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure” In: Virginia
Law Review. Vol. 25, No. 3, p-. 261-272.
ELISEEV, Nikolai, 2004. Civil Procedure Law of Foreign Countries. p. 6.
Available online. In: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=20014991.
Consultation date: 16/11/2021.
HETMANTSEV, Maksym, 2019. “Electronic evidence in civil proceedings:
the practice of application of legislative innovations” In: Enterprise,
Economy and Law. Vol. 2, pp. 19-23.
IBADZADE, Anar Ganimatoglu, 2016. “The system of evidence in the criminal
process of the Republic of Azerbaijan” In: Law and state: theory and
practice. Vol. 8, pp. 121-124.
KAZACHUK, Ivan, 2014. “The Use of Electronic Evidence in Evidence in
Administrative Tort Procedure” In: LegeasiViata. Vol. 8/3, No. 270, pp.
64-67.
MOSKOVCHUK, Dmytro, 2020. “General Characteristics of Electronic
Evidence of the United States and Germany” In: Reforming Civil
Procedure Law in Conditions of Integration Processes in Ukraine: Mater.
The Yu. S. Chervonyi All-Ukrainian Scientic and Practical. Internet-
Conference (Odessa, December 18, 2020); under the editorship of Dr.
of Law, Professor Yu. Holubeva. Odessa: Phoenix, pp. 37-39. Available
online. In: https://hdl.handle.net/11300/14012. Consultation date:
16/11/2021.
NECHYPORUK, Yuliia. 2020. “Liability for the destruction of electronic
evidence in administrative proceedings” In: State and Regions. Vol.
1, pp. 138-141. Available online. In: https://doi.org/10.32840/1813-
338X-2020.1-1.23. Consultation date: 16/11/2021.
394
Asgarova Matanat Pasha, Aliyev Bakhtiyar Abdurakhman Oglu, Fardin Y. Khalilov y Hasanova
Ilhama Zakir kizi
The use of electronic evidence in court: a comparative legal analysis in the world practice
POLYSHCHUK, Anastasyia; KYLYVNYK, Ekateryna, 2019. “The use of
electronic evidence: foreign practice” In: Law Gazette. Asters. Available
online. In: https://www.asterslaw.com/ru/press_center/publications/
use_of_electronic_evidence_foreign_practice/. Consultation date:
16/11/2021.
SCHLOTTERBECK, Walter B; MANSINNE, Andrew. 1970. The Role of the
Department of Defense in Civil Disturbances. Industrial College of the
Armed Forces. New York, USA.
THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF THE REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN,
2000. In: Law No. 907-IQ of the Republic of Azerbaijan of July 14,
2000. Collection of Legislative Acts of the Republic of Azerbaijan, 8.
Available online. In: http://continent-online.com/Document/?doc_
id=30420280. Consultation date: 16/11/2021.
TIMMERBEIL, Sven. 2003. “The role of expert witnesses in German and US
civil litigation” In: Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law.
Vol. 9, No. 1, р. 26.
VERNYDUBOV, Ivan; BELIKOVA, Svitlana, 2018. “Electronic evidences:
concept, features, and problems of their study by the court”
In: Evropskypoliticky a pravnidiskurz. Available online. In: https://
eppd13.cz/wp-content/uploads/2018/2018-5-2/42.pdf. Consultation
date: 16/11/2021.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en enero de 2022, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.40 Nº 72
