Answer:
Option A, ENABLES ENCRYPTION OF THE EVIDENCE.
Explanation:
Admissible evidence, in a court of law, is any testimonial, documentary, or tangible evidence that is introduced to a judge or jury to prove a point (put forth by a party to the proceeding) or element in a case.
However, before an evidence can be used in a case, it must be considered admissible. And for an evidence to be admissible, it must be relevant and not excluded by rules of evidence (generally means it must not be prejudicial and must be reliable).
The government can be viewed as mechanism of accountability, particularly from a provider to a purchaser. Thus, a task for regulation is to set norms which would help make that accountability process fair and effective, this is referred to as the mechanism.
A good accountability mechanism is beneficial in the following ways:
* It has impact on admissibility of evidence in court cases.
* it allows nonrepudiation (it means sufficient evidence exists such that a user can not defend an action).
* It enables encryption of the evidence. Encryption means is the process of encoding a message or information in such a way that only authorized parties can access it and unauthorized parties cannot.
Therefore, option A best suits the question, the impact that a good accountability mechanism has on on the admissibility of evidence in court cases is that it ENABLES THE ENCRYPTION OF THE EVIDENCE.
