On December 6, 2012, Associate Professor Qiao Xiongbing from the Institute of International Law of Wuhan University shared his latest research results with the teachers and students of the Institute of International Law in Room 317. The subject of the academic report was the disclosure system for extra territorial electronic evidence in the US and its impact on China.
Mr. Qiao first described the background information that the electronic storage information has been greatly increased due to the development of information technology, which has brought great influence to the traditional legal system. It not only aroused great interest from the teachers and students, but also gave a lecture on its theme. In summary, Mr. Qiao’s lectures are divided into six parts: the history of the US electronic evidence discovery system; the main content of the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system; and the conflict between the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system and other countries. The United States extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery and the Hague forensics convention; the resolution of the US extraterritorial electronic evidence to explore conflicts with other countries; the impact of the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system on China.
At the beginning of the lecture, Mr. Qiao first gave a general introduction to the history of the electronic evidence discovery system in the United States, which enabled teachers and students to have an overall understanding of the US electronic evidence discovery system, and to recognize this the importance of electronic evidence. In introducing the main content of the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system, Mr. Qiao subdivided this part into six parts: initial disclosure, scope of electronic evidence discovery, form of electronic evidence discovery, privilege and protection of trial preparation materials. And safe harbor terms. After introducing the main contents of the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system, Mr. Qiao also made an overall evaluation and analysis of the US electronic evidence discovery system in light of the views of scholars from various countries.
When talking about the United States' extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system and other countries' conflicts, Mr. Qiao analyzed his conflicts with the European Convention on Human Rights and EU privacy protection legislation. At the same time, Mr. Qiao also pointed out that the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system also conflicts with the obstacle legislation of some countries. At present, many countries have established obstacle legislation, such as Canada, the United Kingdom, France and so on. Therefore, the emergence of extraterritorial electronic evidence in the United States will inevitably lead to conflicts in the obstacle legislation of these countries. Since then, Mr. Qiao analyzed the relationship between the disclosure of extraterritorial electronic evidence in the United States and the Hague Forensics Convention. He pointed out that although the Hague Forensics Convention does not provide for the issue of electronic evidence, the Convention does not prohibit electronic evidence. Explain the applicable convention. When discussing how to resolve the conflict between the United States and the United States in the field of electronic evidence, Mr. Qiao mainly introduced the EU's "Work Report on the Transnational Pre-Trial Evidence of Civil Litigation" and the efforts of the Sedona Conference in this regard. The results achieved.
Finally, Mr. Qiao summarized the impact of the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system on China. He first introduced the Adams v. Asus case, which is more influential in the field of electronic evidence discovery. Through the analysis of the case, the teachers and students deeply felt the impact of the US extraterritorial electronic evidence on China and the improvement of China's relevant legislation. Urgency and necessity. After that, Mr. Qiao specifically analyzed the conflicts between the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery and China's legislation, the impact on Chinese parties, the impact on the Sino-US cross-border civil and commercial dispute resolution mechanism, and its implications for improving China's relevant legislation.
At the end of the lecture, Mr. Qiao put forward some personal suggestions for China to deal with the US extraterritorial electronic evidence discovery system: 1. China should formulate laws for personal information protection as soon as possible; 2. Improve the system of electronic evidence and evidence exchange; 3. Improve relevant A system of extrajudicial forensic assistance. After Mr. Qiao’s wonderful academic report, Prof. Nie Jianqiang, Professor Zhang Qinglin, Associate Professor Shi Lei, Associate Professor Xiao Jun, Associate Professor Cui Xiaojing, Associate Professor Qi Yu, Associate Professor Du Zhihua, Dr. Liang Wenwen and some students from the Institute of International Law of Wuhan University gave a warm report. Sincere suggestions and comments. For example, Associate Professor Shi Lei proposed the Chinese translation of the word Discovery; Associate Professor Cui Xiaojing proposed whether the “out-of-domain” in the topic of the US “External Electronic Evidence Discovery System and Impact on China” should be applied to electronic evidence within the United States, and Proposal to remove the word "out of the field". For these comments and suggestions, Mr. Qiao responded one by one. Finally, the entire academic report ended in the warm applause of the teachers and students of the International Law Institute.
Correspondent: Lian Junya
Office of International Law
