电子追踪科技下当事人隐私权保障研究——以美国判例法为参鉴

发布时间：2018-06-05 10:36

本文选题：科技定位追踪 + 隐私权　；参考：《常州工学院学报(社科版)》2016年01期

【摘要】：电子追踪科技促使刑事侦查监控犯罪能力发生质的飞跃,提升了案件侦破效率,同时也暴露出公权力利用电子追踪科技搜集案件信息蕴含着侵犯公民隐私权的风险。现代电子追踪科技的种类繁多,替代人类感官功能,对公民隐私权造成极大的冲击。以正当程序理念主导刑事诉讼的美国通过一系列定位追踪犯罪的司法判例,不断扩充解释宪法第四修正案的"搜索、扣押"条款,以"合理隐私期待"为现代隐私权界定的标准,"合理理由、令状原则"的司法审查程序保障,平衡公民隐私权与控制犯罪、维护公共安全的关系。我国电子追踪侦查技术在理论上未受到充分关注,立法的不作为使之游离于法律规范之外,实践中强制侦查法定的形式化,侵犯和干预公民隐私权。因此,有必要参考借鉴美国相关判例与立法,构建完善的电子追踪侦查法律机制。
[Abstract]:Electronic tracing technology promotes the qualitative leap of criminal investigation and surveillance ability, improves the efficiency of case detection, and at the same time exposes that the public power to collect case information by electronic tracing technology contains the risk of infringing citizens' right to privacy. Modern electronic tracing technology has a variety of types, replacing human sensory function, which has a great impact on citizens' right to privacy. The United States, which led criminal proceedings with the concept of due process, continued to expand and interpret the "search, seizure" clause of the fourth Amendment through a series of judicial precedents aimed at locating and tracking crimes. Taking "reasonable expectation of privacy" as the standard of defining the modern right of privacy and ensuring the judicial review procedure of "reasonable reason, writ principle", the relationship between the right to privacy of citizens and the control of crime and the maintenance of public security is balanced. The technology of electronic tracing investigation in our country has not been paid enough attention to in theory, the omission of legislation makes it deviate from the legal norm, and the formalization of compulsory investigation in practice infringes and interferes with the citizen's right to privacy. Therefore, it is necessary to refer to the relevant cases and legislation of the United States, and build a perfect legal mechanism of electronic tracking investigation.
【作者单位】：苏州大学王健法学院;
【分类号】：D971.2;DD915

【参考文献】