Can the telephone recording of witness testimony testify?

Telephone recordings of relevant knowledge can be notarized. Call and record in front of a notary, and the notary office will issue a certificate of evidence preservation. The Supreme People's Court's Provisions on Evidence in Civil Proceedings stipulates that notarized evidence has higher probative power than ordinary evidence. The court can confirm that the notarized recording has not been edited, and the notarization fee is not high. Beijing165438+1October 30th news (reporter Xiao * intern reporter Liu _) According to the Voice of China report, a dispute needs telephone recording, and this recording wants to be used as legal evidence. What should I do? Recently, Hangzhou has made such a new move, called the telephone recording notarization system. This is also the first telephone recording notarization system in China. This telephone recording notarization system was jointly launched by China * * Hangzhou Branch, * * Ancun Network Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou West Lake Notary Office and * * Cloud Computing Co., Ltd. How does it work? Simply put, the third party records the telephone voice of users and others to provide evidence preservation. So, can this recording be an effective testimony in court? The day before yesterday, "the first notarized recorded telephone call in China" was officially opened in Hangzhou, Zhejiang. "Well-founded, your word. A telephone to preserve evidence "-This paper introduces the functions of the system on the official website of" An Cun Quotations ". Specifically, if a dispute requires telephone recording, and the recording is submitted to the court as evidence, the system can be used to download total recall from official website named "An Cun Quotations" and directly hand it over to the notary office from the background to issue a notarial certificate as evidence of rights protection and complaints. So, how to realize the so-called "empty talk"? * * The customer service staff of Ancun Network Technology Co., Ltd. said that this service is "free to open and paid to use". Customer service staff: the opening is free, and there is no monthly rent and no guaranteed consumption. We charge 50 cents per minute according to the recording time during your actual use. Pay through AliPay. The customer service staff said that at present, both mobile phone users and fixed-line phone users will record the next call as long as they dial 95 105856 in front of the other party's phone number before the call, and all the recordings will be stored on the platform. The customer service staff said that once you enter this cloud storage platform, no one can tamper with total recall. The total recall can be kept for two years after payment. According to the customer service staff, the service can be used all over the country at present. However, to issue a notarial certificate, it is temporarily limited to Zhejiang. Customer service staff: At present, it can only be notarized in Zhejiang Province. Although it can't be notarized at the local notary office, it can be transferred to Hangzhou, or people or units in Hangzhou can be entrusted to notarize here. In official website, where the quotation is saved, there is a button of "Apply for Notarization" and a balance icon at the back of each recording. After clicking, you can issue a notarial certificate, and then go to the notary department to receive the notarial certificate. Of course, the notarization fee for recording needs to be charged separately according to the regulations of the notary unit. It is understood that at present, the notarization fee for each recording is around 700 yuan. Through this system, telephone recording forensics is no longer a technical problem, but in practice, many listeners will be worried. For example, will telephone recording infringe on the privacy of the recorded person? Can a recording without the permission of the other party be accepted as evidence by the court? Last night, we also launched a public opinion survey on the Weibo. Regarding whether such evidence can be used as court evidence, 64.2% of netizens think so, and the remaining 35.8% think not. Netizen "Red Rose" believes that this kind of recording is valuable as long as it is convenient for the court to collect evidence. Red rose: I think it's good to use it voluntarily. You can use this method. I think it can be used as evidence in court, because although there is no video, as far as I know, such a recording can still be used as evidence in terms of legal effect, and it will also facilitate the enforcement of the law. I still agree and support this method. Netizen "Bailing 20 12" believes that as long as the integrity and legality of the recording can be confirmed, it can be used as evidence. Netizen "Night Farewell" said that it sounds good and feasible, but it depends on practice to see if it can be operated. Netizen "Wu" disagreed with this approach. He said that he thought that the evidence provided by total recall could only prove that the recording did happen, but it could not prove the authenticity of the recording. While debating whether the recording can become evidence, many people are also worried that the privacy of the parties will be violated. Netizen: I think this kind of recording notarization must be carried out with the consent of both parties. If you only agree unilaterally and provide evidence directly, is it possible that there is such a suspicion of invasion of privacy? Netizen: General recall actually plays a very important role in some fields. For example, the money can be used as evidence when it is not fully recalled, but I think that in the process of using the full recall, we should pay attention to protecting the privacy of the parties in judicial practice, otherwise it will be infringement. So, will the court take evidence from this recording? Is the notarization of telephone recording valuable? A notary of Hangzhou West Lake Notary Office said that at present, the court accepts the telephone recording notarization issued by them. Notary of West Lake: Whether the court will adopt this evidence is the key issue. Under normal circumstances, the problem is not big, but whether some courts will have differences has not yet been encountered. The court's consistent way of accepting recorded materials is that notarized telephone recordings have relatively high probative power. But it is difficult to prove the main facts of the case only by telephone recording. In addition, without the other party's knowledge, will private recording infringe upon the legitimate rights and interests of others? In this regard, Hong Jinde, a professor at China University of Political Science and Law, said that this concern is unnecessary. Hong * De: We are against secret recording. For example, if you are chatting with your friend, I have nothing to do with this conversation. I don't participate in the conversation. Then I secretly recorded your conversation with your friend. It's called secret recording. If you record your participation in the conversation, the recording of your participation in the discussion is legal and effective, and there is no infringement on the other party. Whether the telephone recording notarization document has legal effect and how effective it is to prove it is the key factor for the popularization and application of this technical service nationwide. Professor Hong * de believes that it is difficult to say to what extent the notarization of telephone recordings can support the facts advocated by the parties. Hong * De: The only difference between audio materials and notarized telephone recording is that notarized telephone recording no longer examines whether the recording itself is false, but only solves this problem. But what is the content of this electronic evidence and what can such content prove? This has nothing to do with notarization. Now many people have misunderstood the contents of notarization at this point, and what I said can't be proved to be an objective fact after notarization. These are two concepts. Hong Jinde said that from this perspective, this kind of telephone recording notarization is of little significance. Hong * De: For those who don't want to cheat, it doesn't matter whether there is this recording or not. Those who don't want to tie themselves on the phone, I'll be finished if I don't answer his phone. First of all, I didn't answer, second, I didn't speak when I answered, and third, I firmly refused to admit what was said on the other end of the phone. Notarization of telephone recordings like this is worthless. (This article Source: China Broadcasting Network)

Legal objectivity:

The evidence in Article 66 of the Civil Procedure Law includes: (1) the statement of the parties; (2) Documentary evidence; (3) Physical evidence; (4) Audio-visual materials; (5) Electronic data; (6) Testimony of witnesses; (7) Appraisal opinions; (8) Records of the inquest. Evidence must be verified before it can be used as a basis for ascertaining facts. Article 67 The parties have the responsibility to provide evidence of their own claims. The people's court shall investigate and collect evidence that the parties and their agents ad litem cannot collect on their own due to objective reasons, or evidence that the people's court considers necessary for hearing a case. The people's court shall comprehensively and objectively examine and verify the evidence in accordance with legal procedures.