An Empirical Analysis and Systematic Reconstruction of the Exclusionary Rule for Illegal Electronic Evidence

Abstract

China's exclusionary rules for illegal electronic evidence face dual challenges in the digital era: insufficient normative supply and operational dysfunction in practice. By integrating Liu Pinxin's "Derivation-Data-Acquisition" evidence system theory, Zhang Zetao's empirical findings on administrative procedures substituting for investigations, Wang Zhiyong's logic distinguishing evidence admissibility from probative value, Hou Dongliang's conceptualized exclusion criteria, He Yue's blockchain regulatory solutions, and Han Xu's quantitative judicial practice research, this study reveals that current rules fail to address the unique characteristics of electronic evidence. This results in only a 3% exclusion rate for illegal electronic evidence in judicial practice, accompanied by structural biases such as "prioritizing authenticity over legality," "circumventing criminal regulations through administrative procedures," and "replacing procedural review with technical authentication." The study proposes a threefold improvement approach: (1) establishing a specialized rule system of "illegality-non-remediability-unified exclusion" at the normative level; (2) creating a dual-axis review model of "rights infringement degree-technical compliance" at the standard level; and (3) enhancing the "judicial alliance chain" technology and evidence coordination mechanism between administrative and criminal procedures at the procedural level. This integrated research provides normative solutions for amending the Criminal Procedure Law that combine theoretical innovation with practical needs.