UK Courts Face Historic Shift in Digital Evidence Standards with New Data Bill Amendment

· 1 min read

article picture

A new amendment to the UK's Data (Use and Access) Bill aims to reshape how courts view computer evidence, addressing longstanding concerns about the presumption of computer reliability in legal proceedings.

The current legal system operates under the assumption that "mechanical instruments," including computer networks, are functioning correctly if they appear to be working properly to users. This presumption has faced growing criticism from legal experts over the past decade.

Barrister Stephen Mason has been a leading voice challenging this legal principle, arguing that automatically assuming computer systems are reliable effectively shifts the burden of proof onto defendants. This can create substantial challenges for individuals accused of crimes involving digital evidence, as proving a computer system was malfunctioning can be exceptionally difficult.

The proposed amendment, put forward by Lord James Arbuthnot and other peers in the House of Lords, seeks to modify this presumption. Lord Arbuthnot's involvement is particularly noteworthy given his decade-long advocacy for Subpostmasters affected by the Post Office scandal.

While the "mechanical instruments" presumption has not been directly cited in Subpostmaster cases, experts suggest its underlying principle has influenced how digital evidence is treated in courts. Cases like those of Seema Misra and Lee Castleton highlight the practical difficulties defendants face when challenging evidence from computer systems.

The amendment represents a potential shift in how UK courts approach digital evidence, recognizing the complex nature of modern computer systems and the need for a more balanced approach to establishing their reliability in legal proceedings.

This legislative change could have far-reaching implications for future cases involving digital evidence, potentially providing better protections for defendants while maintaining the integrity of the legal process.

Note: None of the provided links were contextually relevant to this article about UK legal amendments regarding computer evidence reliability, so no links were inserted per the instructions.