论个人信息保护民事公益诉讼之起诉主体——兼论《个人信息保护法》第70条之不足及完善

On the Subject of Prosecution in Civil Public Interest Litigation for the Personal Information Protection——Also on the Deficiency and Improvement of Article 70 of the Personal Information Protection Law

我国《个人信息保护法》第70条确立了个人信息保护民事公益诉讼制度,但对起诉主体范围之界定不够科学,且未对起诉主体顺位作出安排。在起诉主体范围方面,检察院在个人信息权益保护方面取得了良好效果,应予以保留;“法律规定的消费者组织”过于狭窄,其他旨在保护个人信息公共利益的社会组织也应享有起诉资格,从立法协调性角度考虑并与首次确定了民事公益诉讼制度的《民诉法》第58条第1款保持一致,应将“法律规定的消费者组织”改为“法律规定的机关和有关组织”;作为行政机关的国家网信部门不适宜提起诉讼,也不拥有确定起诉主体之权力,故应删除“由国家网信部门确定的组织”之表述。在起诉主体顺位方面,《个人信息保护法》第70条将检察院列于首位,这一做法与《民诉法》第58条以及《检察公益诉讼解释》第13条之规定不符,也与检察实践之具体做法相悖;应遵循检察谦抑性之要求,坚持“法律规定的机关和有关组织”第一顺位、检察院第二顺位之起诉主体安排;且检察院在提起个人信息保护民事公益诉讼之前均应履行诉前公告程序;在独立的个人信息保护民事公益诉讼与刑事附带民事公益诉讼之间,检察院应作何选择或会作何选择,值得关注。

Article 70 of the China’s Personal Information Protection Law establishes the civil public interest litigation system for personal information protection,but the definition of the scope of the subject of prosecution is not scientific enough,and there is no provision for the order of the subject of prosecution.In terms of the scope of the subject of prosecution,the procuratorate has achieved good results in the protection of personal information rights and interests,which should be retained;the“consumer organizations stipulated by law”is narrow,and other social organizations aiming to protect the public interests of personal information It should also have the qualification to sue.From the perspective of legislative coordination and consistent with Article 55,paragraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Law,which established the civil public interest litigation system for the first time,the“consumer organization prescribed by law”should be changed to“Organs and relevant organizations prescribed by law”;the national cybersecurity and informatization department as an administrative organ is not suitable for filing lawsuits,nor does it have the power to determine the subject of prosecution,so the expression“organizations determined by the national cybersecurity and informatization department”should be deleted.In terms of the order of prosecution,Article 70 of the China’s Personal Information Protection Law places the procuratorate first,which is inconsistent with Article 55 of the Civil Procedure Law and Article 13 of the Interpretation of Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Procuratorial Public Interest Litigation Cases.It is also contrary to the specific practice of procuratorial practice;the requirements of procuratorial humility should be followed,and the arrangement of prosecuting subjects in the first order of“authorities and relevant organizations prescribed by law”and the procuratorate in second order;the pre-litigation announcement procedure should be performed before litigation;between independent civil public interest litigation for personal information protection and criminal incidental civil public interest litigation,it is worth paying attention to what choice the procuratorate should make or will make.