“Even the wind leaves a trail—if you know where to look.”
— African Proverb
In a time when deepfakes, filters, and artificial intelligence distort the boundaries of perception, today’s legal practitioner must become a master of both law and technology. A single WhatsApp message can tilt the scale in a multimillion-naira contract dispute. A screenshot may decide guilt or innocence in a criminal trial.
Digital evidence has not only entered the courtroom—it is reshaping it. In this digital age, authentication is the compass lawyers use to navigate an environment where information is abundant but trust is rare. For Nigerian lawyers, this transformation offers opportunity, immense responsibility, and the burden of evolution.
A Brief Historical Lens
Electronic evidence is not a stranger to the Nigerian legal system. As far back as Esso West Africa Inc. v. T. Oyegbola (1969) 1 N.M.L.R 194, the Supreme Court acknowledged the inevitable influence of computers on modern litigation, stating:
“The law cannot be and is not ignorant of modern business methods and must not shut its eyes to the mysteries of the computer.”
However, it wasn’t until the Evidence Act of 2011, particularly Section 84, that courts were given a structured legal framework for admitting electronically generated documents. The legal landscape was further updated with the Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2023, expanding provisions to include digital signatures, electronic oaths, and computer simulations.
Despite these developments, many practitioners continue to stumble at a critical threshold: authentication—the legal and technical bridge between a document’s mere existence and its admissibility.
What is Authentication?
Authentication is the process of proving that evidence is what it purports to be. It’s not just about whether a file exists or a message was forwarded—it’s about origin, integrity, and reliability.
In digital evidence, authentication ensures the evidence is genuine. Relevance connects it to the case. Once both are satisfied, admissibility is determined. However, weight is assessed by the court, considering factors like reliability, method of collection, and metadata.
In the past, authentication might involve an original contract or handwriting verification. Today, it might mean interpreting server logs, metadata, timestamps, or even lines of code.
I once handled a case where the opposing party submitted photos as evidence of service. The embedded timestamps showed the photos were taken months after the claimed service date. The device name didn’t match the one listed in the Certificate. The court rejected the evidence, causing the claim to collapse. A stark reminder of the importance of scrutinizing digital evidence and metadata.
Old Doctrine, New Tools
Section 84 of the Evidence Act remains the cornerstone of digital authentication in Nigeria. It provides two primary methods:
- Oral testimony from the document’s creator or custodian.
- Certificate of compliance, detailing how the document was produced and verifying system functionality.
This dual approach was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Dickson v. Sylva (2017) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1567) 167. Reliability here refers to consistent system performance, while integrity assesses whether the data has remained unchanged from creation to court presentation.
Ultimately, authentication is not about technology alone. It is about trust—in process, system, and intention.
Practical Handling of Electronic Evidence
- Understand the Nature of the Evidence
Is it a text, screenshot, email, audio, or social media post? Each has vulnerabilities. Screenshots can be altered. Tweets deleted. Emails spoofed. During an IP mediation, a party submitted a WhatsApp screenshot to prove jingle ownership. The message was real—but the timestamp was fake, altered by changing the phone’s clock. The format rendered it unreliable. - Preserve the Chain of Custody
From collection to court, every access, copy, and modification must be logged. This audit trail protects the evidence from challenges of tampering. - Collect Metadata
Metadata contains creation dates, authorship, file history, and more. Sometimes, it tells the story that the content doesn’t. - Engage Digital Forensics Experts
Forensic professionals provide technical validation, extract data properly, and prepare expert reports that boost credibility.
How to Authenticate Electronic Evidence in Nigeria
Authentication is a narrative, not a checklist. But certain elements are essential:
-
Identify the Source: Who created the file? Can they testify to it?
-
Document Chain of Custody: Record all handling from start to finish.
Secure a Certificate of Compliance: This must state:
- Identity and role of the certifier
- Description of the system used
- Confirmation that the system was operational
- That the evidence was produced in the normal course of business
- That it was not altered
Courts may also accept circumstantial authentication. In a recent cyberbullying case, although the defendant denied sending anonymous messages, the tone, grammar, and context mirrored previous messages. The court admitted the messages as “linguistically traceable” and accepted them.
Always anticipate objections. Be ready with server logs, forensic reports, and corroborating testimony.
Final Reflections
Having mentored young lawyers in digital rights, I’ve seen how mastering the technical side of electronic evidence transforms outcomes. As courtrooms go digital, we must recognize that while digital evidence may be silent, it leaves digital footprints—if you know how to follow them.
Tendering electronic evidence demands more than compliance certificates; it calls for an intimate understanding of how digital media works. Like the skilled hunter who reads the wind, the modern lawyer must learn to read the data—not just its content, but its journey.
Folarin Aluko is an IP Lawyer, Digital Rights Expert, and Partner at Trumann Rockwood Solicitors.
He can be reached at: fmaluko@trumann-rockwood.com
Read More:
Pinciting in Legal Writing: Making the Court’s Work Easier and Boosting Your Credibility
