Abstract

The Nigerian criminal justice system has, over the last decade, confronted a growing volume of digital material such as call logs, closed-circuit television footage, forensic disk images, email correspondence, and social-media records. This study examines how such material becomes admissible in criminal proceedings, and whether the governing rules keep pace with the technologies they regulate. Working from doctrinal legal method, the study reads the Evidence Act 2011 together with the reforms introduced by the Evidence (Amendment) Act 2023, and situates both against the leading appellate authorities, most prominently the Supreme Court decision in Kubor v Dickson. The analysis shows that section 84 remains the doctrinal spine of admissibility, demanding proof that the producing computer functioned properly and that the data flowed through it in the ordinary course of activity, with a certificate under section 84(4) supplying the usual gateway. However, the 2023 Amendment reshapes the terrain by inserting sections 84A to 84D, recognising electronic records, digital signatures, electronic authentication, and audio-visual oath-taking. The study finds that the reform modernises vocabulary and widens the category of admissible material, yet leaves several fault-lines unresolved. Foremost among these is the unsettled relationship between the new section 84B, opening with a "notwithstanding" clause, and the mandatory certification the courts have long enforced. Judicial inconsistency over bank statements and computer-generated public documents compounds the uncertainty. The study concludes that admissibility in Nigeria now rests on a hybrid framework whose coherence depends less on further legislation than on disciplined appellate interpretation, forensic capacity, and clearer treatment of authentication and chain of custody.