References
- Al-Khawaja and Tahery v the United Kingdom, 26766/05, 22228/06 (ECtHR [GC] 15 December 2011). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-108072 - Bellman, R. (1978). An Introduction to Artificial Intelligence: Can Computers Think?, San Francisco, Calif. Boyd & Fraser.
- Brzuszczyński v Poland, No. 23789/09 (ECtHR 17 September 2013). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-126352 - Bykov v Russia, No. 4378/02 (ECtHR [GC] 10 March 2009). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-91704 - Çakici v Turkey (ECtHR [GC] 8 July 1999). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-58282 - Clark, J., Barton, B., Albarqouni, L., Byambasuren, O., Jowsey, T., Keogh, J., Liang, T., Moro, C., O’Neill, H., Jones, M. (2025). Generative Artificial Intelligence Use in Evidence Synthesis: A Systematic Review. Research Synthesis Methods, 16 (4). 601–619.
https://doi.org/10.1017/rsm.2025.16 - Conseil de l’Europe. (ed). (2019). Preuves électroniques dans les procédures civiles et administratives: Lignes directrices adoptées par le comité des ministres du conseil de l’Europe le 30 janvier 2019 et exposé des motifs, Strasbourg. Éditions du Conseil de l’Europe.
- Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law 2024
- Cuellar, M., Kiu, H., To, Mehrotra, A. (2025). Accuracy and Fairness of Facial Recognition Technology in Low-Quality Police Images: An Experiment With Synthetic Faces. arXiv. 1–26.
https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2505.14320 - De Hert, P., Bouchagiar, G. (2025). AI Generated Evidence Brought Before European Courts: Further Activation of Evidence Law, Defence Rights and Human Oversight Needed. Shimla Law Review, 7 (1). 1–40.
https://doi.org/10.70556/hpnlu-slr-v7-I1-2024-01 - Dhirani, L.L., Mukhtiar, N., Chowdhry, B.S., Newe, T. (2023). Ethical Dilemmas and Privacy Issues in Emerging Technologies: A Review. Sensors, 23 (3). 1151.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031151 - Dzelili v Germany (Déc.), No. 15065/05 (ECtHR 29 September 2009). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-95240 - E, R.B., Wellman, F.L. (1904). The Art of Cross-Examination; With the Cross-Examinations of Important Witnesses in Some Celebrated Cases. The American Law Register (1898–1907), 52 (3). 189.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3306743 - ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:1878, Rechtbank Den Haag, C-09-550982-HA ZA 18-388 (English), ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:1878 (Rb. Den Haag 5 February 2020). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:1878 - Erkapić v Croatia, No. 51198/08 (ECtHR 25 April 2013). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-118734 - European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice. (2018). European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and Their Environment, Strasbourg, Council of Europe.
- European Commission. (2018a). A definition of AI: Main capabilities and scientific disciplines.
- European Commission. (2018b). Communication from the European Commission Artificial Intelligence for Europe.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52018DC0237 - Evidence and Proofs from the Perspective of the European Court of Human Rights. (n.d.).
- Evidence. (n.d.). In The Free Dictionary. Retrieved 3 April 2026,
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/evidence - Federal Court of Australia. (2026). GPN-AI: Practice Note – Artificial Intelligence.
https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/law-and-practice/practice-documents/practice-notes/gpn-ai - Feuerriegel, S., Hartmann, J., Janiesch, C., Zschech, P. (2023). Generative AI. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 66, 116–126.
- Flach, P.A. (2012). Machine Learning: The Art and Science of Algorithms That Make Sense of Data, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
- Gani v Spain, No. 38621/97 (ECtHR 19 February 2013). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-116836 - García Ruiz v Spain, No. 4035/08 (ECtHR [GC] 21 January 1999). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-58907 - Gardiner, G. (2023). Corroboration. American Philosophical Quarterly, 60 (2). 131–148.
https://doi.org/10.5406/21521123.60.2.03 - Grimm, P.W., Grossman, M.R., Cormack, G.V. (2021). Artificial Intelligence as Evidence. Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property, 19 (1), 9–106.
- Grossman, M.R., Grimm, P.W., Brown, D.G. (2023). Is Disclosure and Certification of the Use of Generative AI Really Necessary? Judicature, 107 (2), 69–77.
- hlr. (2017, March 10). State v. Loomis. Harvard Law Review. Retrieved 19 August 2026
https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-130/state-v-loomis/ - Ho, H.L. (2021). ‘The legal concept of evidence’, in E.N. Zalta (ed), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021), Metaphysics Research Lab, Standford, Stanford University,
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/evidence-legal/ - Jasper v the United Kingdom, No. 27052/95 (ECtHR [GC] 16 February 2000). Retrieved 19 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-58495 - Kobiashvili v Georgia, No. 36416/06 (ECtHR 14 March 2019). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-191544 - Krishna Pasupuleti, M. (2024). ‘Artificial intelligence in legal services: enhancing case analysis and streamlining legal processes’, in AI in Legal Research: Tools for Streamlining Case Analysis and Decision Making, First Edn., Delhi, National Education Services, pp. 87–99.
https://doi.org/10.62311/nesx/932120 - Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). Federal Rule of Evidence 702: Testimony by expert witnesses. Cornell Law School. Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_702 - Li, C. (2025). Artificial Intelligence Evidence: Concepts, Nature and Applications. Frontiers in Humanities and Social Sciences, 5 (5). 62–69.
https://doi.org/10.54691/6g9r5911 - Mallow, D. M. S. (2020). The Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence with Reference to the Malaysian Evidence Act 1950.
- Melillo, M. (2021, February). Forms of Evidence. Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Law. Oxford Public International Law. Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://doi.org/10.1093/law-mpeipro/e3571.013.3571 - Mitchell, A.D., Let, D., Tang, L. (2023). AI Regulation and the Protection of Source Code. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 31 (4). 283–301.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaad026 - Monaghan, N. (2015). Law of Evidence, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139097178 - National Center for State Courts. (2025). Evaluating acknowledged AI-generated evidence. Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://www.ncsc.org/resources-courts/evaluating-acknowledged-ai-generated-evidence - Neil, R., Zanger-Tishler, M. (2025). Algorithmic Bias in Criminal Risk Assessment: The Consequences of Racial Differences in Arrest as a Measure of Crime. Annual Review of Criminology, 8 (1). 97–119.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-022422-125019 - Nojeim, G., & Bowman, T. (2026, February 18). Inadmissible? AI Evidence in Court. Center for Democracy and Technology. Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://cdt.org/insights/inadmissible-ai-evidence-in-court/ - OECD. (n.d.). AI principles. OECD. Retrieved 15 April 2026, Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/ai-principles.html - Parikh, P.M., Shah, D.M., Parikh, K.P. (2023). Judge Juan Manuel Padilla Garcia, ChatGPT, and a Controversial Medicolegal Milestone. Indian Journal of Medical Sciences, 75 (1). 3–8.
https://doi.org/10.25259/IJMS_31_2023 - Pierce, N., & Goutos, S. (2023). Why Law Firms Must Responsibly Embrace Generative AI. SSRN Electronic Journal.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4477704 - Resource Centre Cyberjustice and AI | Tableau Public. (n.d.). Retrieved 31 March 2026, Retrieved 19 August 2026,
https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/cepej/viz/ResourceCentreCyberjusticeandAI/AITOOLSINITIATIVESREPORT?publish=yes - Reuters. (2025, May 2). U.S. judicial panel advances proposal to regulate AI-generated evidence. Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-judicial-panel-advances-proposal-regulate-ai-generated-evidence-2025-05-02/ - Schatschaschwili v Germany, No. 9154/10 (ECtHR [GC] 15 December 2015). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-1595669 - Schenk v Switzerland, No. 57572/16 (ECtHR 12 July 1988). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-57572 - Singh, S., Devi, L. (2025). “Reliability and Admissibility of AI-Generated Forensic Evidence in Criminal Trials.” Book in Proceedings of The National Seminar Criminal Law and Justice Reforms. 45–53.
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.06048 - Skaramuca, D. (2025). Evaluating the Admissibility of AI Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Legal Standards and Ethical Implications. p. 24.
- State v Loomis 881 N.W.2d 749 (2016).
- UNESCO. (2022). Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, Paris, UNESCO, p. 44.
- What Is Generative AI?, (2021, February 9). IBM Research. Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://research.ibm.com/blog/what-is-generative-AI - Wood, M.A. (2021). Rethinking How Technologies Harm. The British Journal of Criminology, 61 (3). 627–647.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azaa074 - Yevgeniy Ivanov v Russia, No. 27100/03 (ECtHR 25 April 2013). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-118729 - Yüksel Yalçinkaya v Türkiye, No. 15669/20 (ECtHR [GC] 26 September 2023). Retrieved 20 August 2026,
https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-227636
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25143/socr.2026.012 | Journal eISSN: 2256-0548
Language: English
Page range: 1 - 9
Published on: Sep 25, 2026
Published by: Riga Stradins University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 3 issues per year
Related subjects:
© 2026 Olena Leshchenko, published by Riga Stradins University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.