Digital Evidence v Artificial Evidence

Jul 1, 2024

With the proliferation of Artificial Intelligence (AI), it has never been easier to manipulate messages, videos or graphics. Therefore, the integrity of digital evidence in the age of artificial intelligence is under scrutiny.



The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies into everyday life, including the labour law arena, presents a dual-edged sword. On one hand, it offers enhanced capabilities for communication, efficiency, and evidence collection. On the other hand, it introduces significant risks, particularly regarding the authenticity and reliability of digital evidence. In South Africa, where WhatsApp messages are now accepted as digital evidence in courts, including the CCMA and bargaining councils, these challenges are particularly pertinent.


The Challenge of AI-Generated Manipulations

AI’s ability to create highly realistic deep fakes and mimic voices poses a serious threat to the integrity of digital evidence. Deep fakes can convincingly alter video footage to show individuals saying or doing things they never did. Similarly, AI-driven voice synthesis can produce audio recordings that sound authentic but are entirely fabricated. These technologies can be weaponised to undermine the credibility of digital evidence, leading to potential miscarriages of justice.


Admissibility of Digital Evidence

South African courts’ acceptance of WhatsApp messages as digital evidence is a progressive step, reflecting the realities of modern communication. However, this also necessitates stringent measures to ensure that such evidence is not tampered with. The legal system must adapt to include robust verification processes for digital evidence, such as:

  1. Forensic Analysis: Employing advanced forensic techniques to authenticate digital communications. This can involve metadata analysis, examining the chain of custody, and using software to detect anomalies indicative of manipulation.
  2. Chain of Custody Documentation: Ensuring a well-documented chain of custody for digital evidence, which tracks the handling of evidence from collection to presentation in court. This can help establish authenticity and integrity.
  3. Expert Testimony: Leveraging experts in digital forensics to testify on the reliability and authenticity of the presented digital evidence. Experts can explain the methods used to verify evidence and address any doubts about its legitimacy.

Legal and Ethical Consideration

The legal system must also consider the ethical implications of AI in the context of evidence. There is a need for:

  • Regulatory Frameworks: Developing regulations that specifically address the use of AI in creating and verifying digital evidence. This could include guidelines for the admissibility of AI-generated content and standards for forensic analysis.
  • Education and Training: Providing judges, lawyers, and law enforcement with training on the capabilities and limitations of AI technologies. Understanding how AI can be used both constructively and maliciously is crucial for making informed decisions about evidence.


The proliferation of AI technologies brings both opportunities and challenges to the legal landscape in South Africa. While the acceptance of WhatsApp messages as digital evidence is a step forward, it is imperative to address the accompanying risks. By implementing rigorous verification processes, enhancing legal frameworks, and educating legal professionals, South Africa can better safeguard the integrity of digital evidence in the age of AI.

Disclaimer: LabourMan exclusively provides services to employers.

The content does not constitute legal advice, are not intended to be a substitute for legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Kindly contact us on or 021 556 1075 to speak to one of our consultants.


Wallace Albertyn

Wallace Albertyn is a Senior Associate and Legal Advisor at LabourMan Consultants.

Recent LabourTalk Articles

Dealing With a Fraudulent Sick Certificate

Dealing With a Fraudulent Sick Certificate

Increasingly, employees are submitting suspicious medical certificates, and a recent Labour Appeal Court judgment is not reassuring. The case in point is Woolworths (Pty) Ltd v...

Dismissal of Prolonged Cases by the CCMA

Dismissal of Prolonged Cases by the CCMA

Introduction The case of South African Airways(SOC) Limited (in Business Rescue) and Others v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa obo Members and Others (JA32/2020)...

Understanding Bumping Rights in the Workplace

Understanding Bumping Rights in the Workplace

The concept of bumping in the context of retrenchments is critical for determining the fairness of the selection criteria used by employers when dismissing employees. The...

LabourTalk Newsletters

Subscribe and receive labour related information

Follow us



© 2024 ~ All Rights Reserved  |  Privacy Policy