DIGITAL EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: THE CONCEPT, RELATIONSHIP WITH RELATED CATEGORIES, AND PROSPECTS FOR LEGAL CODIFICATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69635/mssl.2026.2.3.58Keywords:
Evidence, Digital Evidence, Electronic Evidence, Virtual Trace, Electronic Form, Digital Data, Digital Information, Criminal Procedure, DigitalisationAbstract
This article examines the category of ‘digital evidence’ within the context of criminal proceedings. The relevance of the topic stems from the rapid digitalisation of social relations and the shift of criminal activity into the digital environment, which necessitates a comprehensive approach to the use of digital evidence in criminal proceedings. The author’s aim is to formulate an original definition of “digital evidence” and to distinguish it from the related categories of “electronic evidence” and “virtual trace”.
The methodological basis of the study consists of comparative-legal and terminological methods of analysis. The article examines the current criminal procedure legislation of Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan and Türkiye, as well as the provisions of the Digital Codes of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, which define the concepts of ‘digital data’ and ‘digital record’. Particular attention is paid to international experience – the legislation of China and the Philippines, as well as the provisions of the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime. It is established that none of the countries examined formally enshrines the term ‘digital evidence’ in criminal legislation: related categories are used instead – ‘electronic evidence’ (Ukraine, in civil and administrative proceedings), ‘electronic data’ (China), or an open-ended list of evidence without further detail (Türkiye).
The author proposes an original definition of digital evidence that takes into account its immaterial nature, its suitability for automated processing, and the procedural manner of its acquisition. Four alternative legislative solutions are set out for national legal systems – ranging from avoiding detailed regulation to introducing digital evidence as an independent category of evidence. The findings may be used to improve criminal procedure legislation and in further research on the digitalisation of evidence law.
References
Edwards, J. (2018). Theories of criminal law. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/criminal-law/?o=600605&l=dir&qsrc=990&qo=contentPageRelatedSearch&ad=dirN#CrimProcEvid
Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 231-V of 4 July 2014. (2014). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=31575852&ysclid=mthhg1w2ai821484984
Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine No. 4651-VI of 13 April 2012. (2012). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=31197178&doc_id2=31197178&pos=116;252&pos2=1728;244
Criminal Procedure Code of Türkiye No. 5271 (CMK). (n.d.). https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.5271.pdf
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 255-VIII of 9 January 2026 “Digital Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.” (2026). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=38546537&pos=241;64
Digital Code of the Kyrgyz Republic No. 178 of 31 July 2025. (2025). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=37462686&pos=593;136
Bhatti, N. (2026). The use of digital evidence in criminal proceedings. American Journal of Society and Law, 5(1), 10–19. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/403273766_The_Use_of_Digital_Evidence_in_Criminal_Proceedings
Degtyareva, O. (2021). Evidence in criminal proceedings based on electronic evidence. https://library.megu.edu.ua:9443/jspui/handle/123456789/2819
Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine of 18 March 2004 No. 1618-IV. (2004). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=30418564&doc_id2=30418564&pos=129;233&pos2=1479;202
Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine (Arbitration Procedure Code) of 6 November 1991 No. 1798-XII. (1991). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=30418667
Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine of 6 July 2005 No. 2747-IV. (2005). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=30418335&pos=1213;190
Milimko, L. V., & Zhidovtsev, Ya. V. (2025). Electronic evidence in criminal proceedings in Ukraine. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University. Series: Law, 3(88), 302–308. https://visnyk-pravo.uzhnu.edu.ua/article/view/330827/320168
Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine of 13 April 2012 No. 4651-VI. (2012). https://prg.kz/document/?doc_id=31197178&pos=1973;130
Rules and regulations implementing Republic Act of Philippines No. 10175 (“Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012”). (n.d.). https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/13667
The Criminal Procedure Code of the People’s Republic of China of 26 October 2018. (2018). https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zfxxgk/fdzdgknr/bgt/art/2025/art_48b3b0c3f954448e996602a71fc6f878.html
Convention on Cybercrime (ETS No. 185). (2001, November 23). https://rm.coe.int/1680081561
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Alisher Kadyrbekov (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles are published as open access and are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This means that authors retain the copyright to the content of their articles. Under the CC BY 4.0 license, the content can be copied, adapted, displayed, distributed, republished, or otherwise reused for any purpose, including commercial use, provided that proper attribution is given to the original authors.
https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3941-5553
