التنظيم القانوني لإثبات الجريمة بالدليل الرقمي كأحد الاسأليب العلمية " دراسة تحليلية مقارنة"
رامز محمد مرشد جمهور
Ramez Mohammed Murshid Jamhour
This study discusses the lawful regulation of proving a crime using a digital evidence as one of the scientific methods. It is a comparative analytical study with the amended Jordanian Criminal Procedure Law No. 16 of 2001 and the Jordanian Law of Electronic Crimes No. 27 of 2015 in order to show what is the value of the digital evidence and its uses in the criminal proof. One of the objectives of this study is to identify the extent of the legitimacy of the digital guide in evidence, and to identify the uses of scientific methods related to the digital guide, and many other goals Before entering the topic of digital evidence and the related scientific evidence, I opted to talk about crime and penal evidence systems. I talked about what the crime is and distinguish it from other harmful acts and their elements. I dealt with the criminal evidentiary systems, which are the free system and the limited system, as well as the mixed system. The Palestinian legislator adopted the mixed proof system, so he combined the restricted in places and the free in other places. This prompted us to consider the judge’s sentimental conviction, as it is not absolute and subject to specific controls,this is in view of the importance of the evidence theory and the sentimental conviction of the judge in estimating the judiciary worth of the digital evidence, after its conditions are met by the certainty and correctness of the evidence, Then the digital evidence is subject to the judge’s discretion in accordance with these controls. He takes or justifies this leave subject to the supervision of the higher court than him, and the scientific evidence related to the digital evidence is abundant. Criminal photography is one of them. With cameras spread everywhere, photographing the perpetrators or the circumstances of the crime will have the effect to prove the crime and link it to its perpetrator. And the same is true with regard to recording calls and phonograms according to the conditions stipulated by the legislator, whether by taking permission from the Public Prosecution and that the crime be a punishment of no less than six months. And I finally came to the difficulties that the electronic crimes always araise and the digital evidence at the international level, and I showed the extent to which these scientific means are related to the digital evidence in terms of its extraction and submission to the court after comparing it with the data stored in the competent authorities, extracting it and submitting it to the court to be subject to the judge's discretion. The study concluded many of the findings and recommendations . The most important of these results is that the digital evidence is authentic in proving a crime after obtaining it legally, and discussing it in the court publicly. Among the findings that I came to, is that there is a clear deficiency in the legislations concerning the digital directory, especially procedural legislations such as procedures for obtaining the digital directory. As for the recommendations, I see that the most important is that : There must be a legislation to regulate the collection and security of digital evidence using procedural methods consistent with the specificity of the digital evidence. Among the other recommendations is that we should not feel satisfied with the traditional procedures for collecting digital evidence, because it must be accompanied by modern procedures that keep pace with scientific development. In addition to many findings and recommendations that we hope will be a source of benefit to researchers and workers in the legal field.