Admission of electronic evidence
Contradictions in the Kenyan Evidence Act
In its provision for the admissibility of electronic evidence, the Kenyan Evidence Act includes two apparently conflicting provisions. Under section 106B, the Evidence Act prescribes conditions for admissibility, and uses the concept of a certificate as a means of proof of authenticity. On the other hand, under section 78A, electronic evidence is admissible, with no mention of the use of a certificate. There has been conflicting jurisprudence as a result. This paper proposes that section 106B ought to be repealed to give way to the section 78A presumption of admissibility due to numerous issues associated with the certificate.
Index words: Kenya; Evidence Act; conditions for admissibility; electronic evidence; conflicting jurisprudence; Commonwealth Model Law on Electronic Evidence
Copyright, licence and acknowledgement
The author retains copyright and grants the publishers of the Review a licence to publish the article in the Review and to create and maintain digital copies on the internet at the discretion of the publisher and via third parties in subscription databases. The author warrants that they are the owner of all rights of copyright in the article.
Work published in the open access version of Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review on the SAS Open Journals System is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.Where the author subsequently publishes the article, the author is requested to acknowledge the article first appeared in the Review, in whatever format it is subsequently published.
Those who contribute items to Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review retain author copyright in their work but are asked to grant two licences. One is a licence to the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, School of Advanced Study of the University of London, enabling us to reproduce the item in digital form, so that it can be made available for access online in the Open Journals System and repository and website. The terms of the licence which you are asked to grant to the University for this purpose are as follows:
'I grant to the University of London the irrevocable, non-exclusive royalty-free right to reproduce, distribute, display, and perform this work in any format including electronic formats throughout the world for educational, research, and scientific non-profit uses during the full term of copyright including renewals and extensions'
The other licence is for the benefit of those who wish to make use of items published online in IALS Student Law Review and stored in the e-repository. For this purpose we use a Creative Commons licence allowing others to download your works and share them with others as long as they mention you and link back to your entry in Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review and/or SAS-SPACE, but they can't change them in any way or use them commercially.
For the avoidance of doubt, the author is not granted permission to publish the article in the format in which the Review publishes it. The publisher own the copyright to the text as it appears in the published journal. The author may only publish the article in word format or html, unless the author pays the publisher for a licence to re-publish as it is printed.