{"title":"Evidentiary value and evidentiary status of blockchain evidence","authors":"Zelin Su","doi":"10.1177/13657127241238020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Blockchain evidence is a technical method for evidence storage, transmission and fixation. Its evidential value has a dual nature, reflected in the fact that it cannot be absolutely tamper-resistant, can only provide periodic assurance of evidence authenticity and the commonly used consortium chains do not possess all the benefits of public chains. Simultaneously, blockchain evidence occupies a unique status within the entire evidence system, it serves as an evidentiary storage mechanism, is essentially an electronic evidence reflecting both the evidence collection process and outcome and its notarisation and forensic examination documents are a type of opinion evidence. It is evident that blockchain evidence does not emerge in a vacuum, rather than serving as a mere replacement for traditional evidence, blockchain evidence represents an upgrade in the functionality and effectiveness of traditional evidence. From this perspective, the improvement of blockchain evidence rules should align with the basic position of ‘technological neutrality’, which means that although technological evolution can lead to rapid changes, legislators are not always required to cater to these dynamic demands. It is essential to distinguish between on-chain and off-chain when addressing issues of authenticity, hearsay and originality, and improvements proposing should within the frameworks of existing electronic evidence rules and opinion evidence rules, thereby unlocking the potential of blockchain evidence.","PeriodicalId":506826,"journal":{"name":"The International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"6 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International Journal of Evidence & Proof","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127241238020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Blockchain evidence is a technical method for evidence storage, transmission and fixation. Its evidential value has a dual nature, reflected in the fact that it cannot be absolutely tamper-resistant, can only provide periodic assurance of evidence authenticity and the commonly used consortium chains do not possess all the benefits of public chains. Simultaneously, blockchain evidence occupies a unique status within the entire evidence system, it serves as an evidentiary storage mechanism, is essentially an electronic evidence reflecting both the evidence collection process and outcome and its notarisation and forensic examination documents are a type of opinion evidence. It is evident that blockchain evidence does not emerge in a vacuum, rather than serving as a mere replacement for traditional evidence, blockchain evidence represents an upgrade in the functionality and effectiveness of traditional evidence. From this perspective, the improvement of blockchain evidence rules should align with the basic position of ‘technological neutrality’, which means that although technological evolution can lead to rapid changes, legislators are not always required to cater to these dynamic demands. It is essential to distinguish between on-chain and off-chain when addressing issues of authenticity, hearsay and originality, and improvements proposing should within the frameworks of existing electronic evidence rules and opinion evidence rules, thereby unlocking the potential of blockchain evidence.