Production of evidence is crucial to dispensing justice, yet in these days of electronic technology and digital age, there was no provision for allowing electronic records and digital data as evidence before the court in the existing evidence law of Bangladesh. During the shutdown or restriction of Covid-19 pandemic, the court in Bangladesh heard cases virtually, but in production of evidence, there was restriction.
For a long time, the necessity of incorporating electronic records and digital data as evidence was felt in Bangladesh, and finally on Monday, the Cabinet Division gave final approval to the draft Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2022. Very soon, the draft will be placed before parliament.
Once it is passed into law, the prosecution and defence both will be able to produce digital evidence before the court. What are the things that will be regarded as digital evidence? According to the present amendment, digital record or electronic record means any record or information generated, prepared, sent, received or stored in magnetic, electromagnetic, optical or micro films, computer memory, computer generated microfiche including audio, video, DVD, CCTV footage, drone data and records from cell phone, hardware, software or any other digital device as defined in the Digital Security Act 2018. Apart from these, finger, palm, and iris impressions and digital footprints, signatures and certificates will also be admissible as evidence before court.
There are doubts that production of genuine electronic and digital evidence will make proving a case on the evidence of witnesses available in court for cross examination for the evidence they give for or against the prosecution case.
If use of more technology in deciding cases is allowed, the more difficult it will be for the defence to prove a case. In short, the Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2022 can be abused. Therefore, there is an absolute need for thorough screening of digital evidence before they are taken into cognizance by the judges and taken as proof.
Those who are amending laws how legitimate or honest they are in their motive to establish justice where the government itself does not believe in impartial justice? We must have an honestly elected people’s government first to believe in and only this government can be allowed to make changes in law for the good of quality of justice. How much able the present lawmakers are to appreciate in the quality of changes in law? Most of them are businessmen who have no accountability to the people for the people’s good.
It is unfortunate that the bureaucrats who are leading the government, leading it to lawless chaos. The bureaucrats have love for power and not for law.
