استخدام الدليل الإلكتروني لإثبات جرائم التزوير: دراسة مقارنة بين الإمارات العربية المتحدة ومصر
The study aims to investigate the use of electronic evidence to prove forgery offences through a comparative analysis of the UAE and Egypt. In the study, the researcher used the analytical technique, the comparative method, and the inductive approach. The study's dilemma is shown by the key...
Saved in:
| Summary: | The study aims to investigate the use of electronic evidence to prove forgery offences
through a comparative analysis of the UAE and Egypt. In the study, the researcher
used the analytical technique, the comparative method, and the inductive approach.
The study's dilemma is shown by the key question, which is: How is electronic
evidence utilized to establish forgery offences in UAE and Egyptian legislation? The
study yielded several conclusions, the most noteworthy of which was that the UAE
legislator was eager to produce legislative texts that combat electronic forgery
offences since it offered legal protection to electronic papers and signatures. It is also
set its rules and regulatory frameworks, with the most visible example being the UAE
legislator's outlawing of electronic forgery via Article No. (6) of Decree-Law No. (5)
of 2012 on combatting information technology crimes. Furthermore, the study's
findings demonstrated that Egyptian legislators have addressed information crimes by
developing legislative control systems and issuing new punitive legislative texts, such
as Law No. (175) of 2018 and its executive regulations No. (1699) of 2020, which
were issued to combat information technology crimes. Furthermore, the study's
findings revealed that, from the standpoint of Islamic law, restricting the methods of
proof to certain subjects does not allow for growth in safeguarding plaintiffs' rights in
establishing their cases. As a result, the researcher made the following
recommendations: The necessity for lawmakers in both the UAE and Egypt to adopt a
particular legislative rule that handles procedural issues linked to the crime of
electronic forging. Furthermore, the researcher recommends that both UAE and
Egyptian legislators consider the distinct nature of electronic forgery from traditional
forgery, which necessitates the development of a special law to define the acts that
fall under the term electronic forgery. The advantage of the research will help to
establish future visions and frameworks for national, legislative, and administrative
initiatives to combat electronic forgery in both the United Arab Emirates and the Arab
Republic of Egypt. |
|---|