Rivers State University Journal of Public Law

Abstract
A legal provision that does not enhance justice or adapt to contemporary realities such as the impact
of technology on adjudication has outlived its usefulness. Based on the foregoing principle, this paper
examined the continued relevance of section 110 of the Evidence Act, 2011 as amended which empowers the Court to manually compare any signature, writing, seal or finger impression admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the court in order to ascertain whether such a signature, writing, seal or finger impression is that of the person by whom it purports to have been written or made. This became
compelling following the nascent introduction of the admissibility of digital signatures under the
Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2023. The paper established that the power of the Court to manually
compare signatures in this digital age has become superannuated and that for effective determination
of the authenticity of digital signatures or electronic writing, seal or finger impression, a Court should
rely on evidence of forensic experts in terms already provided under the law rather than casual,
analogue or manual comparisons. It was therefore recommended that the provision of section 110 of
the Evidence Act, 2011 should be repealed.

DOWNLOAD PDF