Legal Challenges of Digital Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Comparative Perspectives from Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.2.2.2026.15Keywords:
Digital Evidence, Criminal Proceedings, Electronic Evidence, Cybercrime Law, Digital ForensicsAbstract
The rapid digitalization of modern societies has transformed criminal investigations and judicial proceedings, leading to an unprecedented reliance on digital evidence in the administration of justice. Electronic communications, social media content, mobile device data, cloud storage records, surveillance footage, blockchain transactions, and digital forensic reports have become increasingly important in the detection, prosecution, and adjudication of criminal offenses. Despite these developments, significant legal and procedural challenges remain regarding the admissibility, authenticity, reliability, and evaluation of digital evidence in criminal proceedings. This study examines the legal challenges associated with digital evidence through a comparative analysis of Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia, three Muslim-majority jurisdictions that have undertaken substantial legislative reforms in response to technological advancements and cyber-related crimes.
Employing a qualitative doctrinal and comparative legal methodology, the research analyzes constitutional provisions, criminal procedure laws, cybercrime legislation, electronic transaction regulations, judicial decisions, and international standards governing digital evidence. The study explores key issues relating to the authentication and integrity of electronic evidence, chain of custody requirements, digital forgery and manipulation, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, privacy and data protection concerns, and cross-border evidentiary challenges arising from transnational digital communications. The comparative analysis demonstrates that while Pakistan, Indonesia, and Malaysia have established legal frameworks recognizing the evidentiary value of digital materials, significant differences remain regarding admissibility standards, forensic capabilities, judicial interpretation, and institutional capacity.
The findings reveal that the increasing sophistication of digital technologies presents challenges that traditional evidentiary rules are often ill-equipped to address. Inconsistent legal standards, limited forensic resources, jurisdictional complexities, and the growing prevalence of artificial intelligence-generated content further complicate the effective use of digital evidence in criminal trials. The study argues that greater legal harmonization, enhanced forensic infrastructure, specialized judicial training, and stronger regional cooperation are necessary to ensure the reliability and fairness of digital evidence in criminal justice systems. It concludes by proposing a harmonized framework for digital evidence governance that balances technological innovation, procedural fairness, and the protection of fundamental rights within contemporary criminal proceedings.
References
1. Abdullah, H. O., Maqsood, M., & Nadeem, A. (2025). Digital evidence in criminal proceedings: Legal standards, chain of custody, and evidentiary reliability in the digital era. Research Journal for Social Affairs, 3(5). https://doi.org/10.71317/rjsa.003.05.0375
2. Nath, S., Summers, K., Baek, J., & Ahn, G.-J. (2024). Digital evidence chain of custody: Navigating new realities of digital forensics. In Proceedings - 2024 IEEE 6th International Conference on Trust, Privacy and Security in Intelligent Systems, and Applications (TPS-ISA) (pp. 11–20). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/tps-isa62245.2024.00012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TPS-ISA62245.2024.00012
3. Romaniuk, V., & Ablamskyi, S. (2024). Criteria for the admissibility of digital (electronic) evidence in criminal proceedings. Law and Safety, (2), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.32631/pb.2024.2.13 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32631/pb.2024.2.13
4. Petryk, V. V. (2025). Vykorystannia elektronnykh dokaziv u kryminalnomu provadzhenni: problemy yikh zboru, perevirky ta otsinky [The use of electronic evidence in criminal proceedings: issues of collection, verification, and evaluation]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia: Pravo [Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law], 87(4), 119–123. https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2025.87.4.17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2025.87.4.17
5. Shyshenko, A. O. (2025). Tsyfrovye dokazy u kryminalnomu provadzhenni: problemy avtentychnosti ta dopustymosti [Digital evidences in criminal proceedings: problems of authenticity and admissibility]. Analitychno-Porivnialne Pravoznavstvo [Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence], 5(3), 312–316. https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2025.05.3.46 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2025.05.3.46
6. Matis, J. (2024). Certain aspects of criminal evidence and digital evidence. Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, (2), 701–705. https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2024.02.116 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2024.02.116
7. Allah Rakha, N. (2024). Cybercrime and the law: Addressing the challenges of digital forensics in criminal investigations. Mexican Law Review, 16(2), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24485306e.2024.2.18892 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24485306e.2024.2.18892
8. Luhina, N., & Paliukh, O. (2025). Peculiarities of proof in criminal proceedings related to cybercrime. Social Development: Economic and Legal Issues, (4), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.70651/3083-6018/2025.4.27 DOI: https://doi.org/10.70651/3083-6018/2025.4.27
9. Didenko, O. V. (2025). Tsyfrova kryminalistyka ta mizhnarodna protydiia kiberzlochynnosti (na prykladi elektronnoi komertsii) [Digital forensics and international counteraction to cybercrime (based on the example of e-commerce)]. Analitychno-Porivnialne Pravoznavstvo [Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence], 4(3), 162–167. https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2025.04.3.26 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2788-6018.2025.04.3.26
10. Abdullah, H. O., Maqsood, M., & Nadeem, A. (2025). Digital evidence in criminal proceedings: Legal standards, chain of custody, and evidentiary reliability in the digital era. Research Journal for Social Affairs, 3(5). https://doi.org/10.71317/rjsa.003.05.0375
11. Asgarova, M. P., Aliyev, B. A. O., Khalilov, F. Y., & Hasanova, I. Z. K. (2022). The use of electronic evidence in court: A comparative legal analysis in the world practice. Cuestiones Políticas, 40(72), 373–388. https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4072.21 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4072.21
12. Osco Escobedo, M. A., Chipana Fernández, Y. M. M., Quiñones Li, A. E., Díaz-Pérez, J. J., Calvo de Oliveira Diaz, D. G., & Garcia Quispe, G. B. (2023). Digital evidence as a means of proof in criminal proceedings. Russian Law Journal, 11(5s). https://doi.org/10.52783/rlj.v11i5s.895 DOI: https://doi.org/10.52783/rlj.v11i5s.895
13. Ahmadian, M. (2021). Electronic evidence and its authenticity in forensic evidence. Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 11(1), Article 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-021-00234-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41935-021-00234-6
14. Rashkovsk, D., & Rashkovska, V. (2025). The difference between digital evidence and evidence in digital form. Iustinianus Primus Law Review, 16(2), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.55302/iplr2516268r DOI: https://doi.org/10.55302/iplr2516268r
15. Zahoor, R., Waqar Khan Arif, S. M., & Bannian, B. (2022). Digital evidence and its admissibility under Pakistani law. Journal of Development and Social Sciences, 3(4), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.47205/jdss.2022(3-iv)06 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47205/jdss.2022(3-IV)06
16. Dhumillah, D. S. R. (2024). The stand of electronic evidence in cyber crime law enforcement in Indonesia. Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies, 4(9), 4215–4226. https://doi.org/10.59188/eduvest.v4i9.1812
17. D’Anna, T., Puntarello, M., Cannella, G., Scalzo, G., Buscemi, R., Zerbo, S., & Argo, A. (2023). The chain of custody in the era of modern forensics: From the classic procedures for gathering evidence to the new challenges related to digital data. Healthcare, 11(5), Article 634. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11050634 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11050634
18. Hasanah, L. N., Faisal, M. S., Ahmed, Z., & Hasyim, M. Y. A. (2025). Religious diversity and the digital economy: Legal–academic pathways to harmonize Sharia and international law. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.8
19. Gul, S., Ahmad, F., & Ahmad, R. (2025). Digital evidence and procedural fairness: Reforming cybercrime prosecution in Pakistan. Journal for Social Science Archives, 3(2), 544–554. https://doi.org/10.59075/jssa.v3i2.260 DOI: https://doi.org/10.59075/jssa.v3i2.260
20. Mujiono, & Ticualu, C. (2025). Emerging trends in law and social sciences: Global perspectives on policy, ethics, justice, and institutional reform. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 1(1), 40–60. https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.6
21. Anggraeniko, L. S., Ambarwati, A., & Utami, F. R. (2026). Admissibility of digital evidence in Indonesia: Criminal–civil implications for the chain of custody and evidentiary validity. Priviet Social Sciences Journal, 6(4), 168–177. https://doi.org/10.55942/pssj.v6i4.1566 DOI: https://doi.org/10.55942/pssj.v6i4.1566
22. Azhari, A. M., Azhari, S., & Yaqooq, M. I. (2025). Global transformations in law, justice, and society: Comparative perspectives on governance, rights, and legal reform. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 1(1), 60–90. https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.7
23. Saeed, A., & Adhi, B. Z. (2025). Digital forensics and fair trial rights in Pakistan: Legal, procedural, and institutional challenges in cybercrime prosecutions. Contemporary Journal of Social Science Review, 3(2), 488–499. https://doi.org/10.63878/cjssr.v3i2.1969 DOI: https://doi.org/10.63878/cjssr.v3i2.1969
24. Al-Farjani, S. H., Ahmad, T., & Rana, H. A. S. (2025). Digital innovation, legal reform, and social justice: Interdisciplinary approaches to law, technology, and human rights. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 1(1), 91–129. https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.5
25. Noor, S., Azeem, A., & Maqsood, W. (2025). Enhancing forensic evidence management in Pakistan's criminal justice system: A criminological analysis. Journal of Political Stability Archive, 3(4), 184–195. https://doi.org/10.63468/jpsa.3.4.26 DOI: https://doi.org/10.63468/jpsa.3.4.26
26. Al Azhari, F. U., & Al Azhari, S. I. (2025). Contemporary challenges in harmonizing Sharia, national legal systems, and international law in a rapidly changing world. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 1(1), 130–150. https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.1.1.2025.4
27. Dhumillah, D. S. R. (2024). The stand of electronic evidence in cyber crime law enforcement in Indonesia. Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies, 4(9), 4215–4226. https://doi.org/10.59188/eduvest.v4i9.1812 DOI: https://doi.org/10.59188/eduvest.v4i9.1812
28. Siswanto, M. A., & Ahmad, T. (2026). Climate justice in Islamic legal thought: Harmonizing environmental law, human rights, and sustainable development in OIC countries. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 2(1), 20–41. https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.2.1.2026.14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.2.1.2026.14
29. Costa, V. V. da, Costa, C. da, Cristovao, R. J., Cruz, C. da, & Pinto, F. C. (2026). Reconstruction of regulation for corruption eradication commission officers involved in corruption cases base on justice values. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.2.1.2026.10 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.2.1.2026.10
30. Satyo, B. K., & Prasetyo, B. A. Y. (2026). Artificial intelligence and the future of human rights: Legal accountability for algorithmic decision-making in democratic societies. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 2(1), 54–74. https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.2.1.2026.12 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/ijlss.2.1.2026.12
31. Mustafa, A., Ishaque, M., Raza, R., Samiullah, & Raza, M. I. (2025). When culture meets Fiqh: Examining the legal authority of ʿUrf in contemporary engagement traditions. Global Islamic Research Journal, 1(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.1.1.2025.6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.1.1.2025.6
32. Al Azhari, F. U., Shah, S. H. M., Al Azhari, S. I., Rasool, F., Ahmed, R., Samad, A., & Rehman, A. (2025). The role of Islamic economic principles in family law: A study on inheritance and property rights within the context of child protection. Global Islamic Research Journal, 1(1), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.1.1.2025.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.1.1.2025.2
33. Zubair, A. A., Salman, K., & Zakariyyah, A. O. (2026). Existing legal and regulatory framework for sovereign Sukuk in Nigeria. Global Islamic Research Journal, 2(1), 36–73. https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.2.1.2026.8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.2.1.2026.8
34. Abdullah, H. O., Maqsood, M., & Nadeem, A. (2025). Digital evidence in criminal proceedings: Legal standards, chain of custody, and evidentiary reliability in the digital era. Research Journal for Social Affairs, 3(5), 112–124. https://doi.org/10.71317/rjsa.003.05.0375 DOI: https://doi.org/10.71317/RJSA.003.05.0375
35. Abood, T. A., Dakhil, M. H., Nasef, A. J., Abed, A. Q., & Hamid, A. K. (2026). Authority and interpretation in Qur’anic studies: Re-examining classical tafsīr in contemporary Islamic scholarship. Global Islamic Research Journal, 2(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.2.1.2026.10 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.2.1.2026.10
36. Alwan, F. Y., & Lilo, I. Y. (2026). Defending religious tradition in modern times: Comparative responses of Muslim and Christian scholars to scriptural criticism. Global Islamic Research Journal, 2(1), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.2.1.2026.11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.65960/girj.2.1.2026.11
37. Cami, G. (2024). Legal standards for cross-border access to electronic evidence in criminal procedure: An Albanian perspective on international standards. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, 33(5), 11–30. https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2024.33.5.11-30 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2024.33.5.11-30
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Law and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The International Journal of Law and Social Science (IJLSS) publishes all articles under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
The full legal code of the license is available at:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
