打击犯罪视域下网络监控的措施定位及其法律规制

Positioning of network surveillance measures and their legalregulation within the context of crime fighting

打击犯罪视域下,网络监控分为立案前网络监控与立案后网络监控,前者包括对公共数据的网络监控、对私人数据的网络监控和制止型网络监控;后者包括对社会管理数据库的网络监控和对计算机信息系统的网络监控。根据程序法定原则和比例原则,鉴于各类网络监控的适用主体、适用方式、适用对象和适用内容等均有所不同,网络监控的措施定位及其法律规制亦不能一概而论。上述五类网络监控依次分别属于行政执法、技术侦察、技术侦查、一般强制侦查和技术侦查。目前我国相关立法对各类网络监控的法律规制存在诸多不足,包括措施定位缺失、适用限制笼统且不充分等。应以程序法定原则和比例原则为基础,结合各类网络监控对公民权利的侵害程度,为其设定不同的法律规制模式,完善其法律规制的不足。对公共数据的网络监控,应限定适用主体,划定适用内容、适用方式,增设审批制度,强化与刑事诉讼的程序衔接;对私人数据的网络监控,应明确适用范围,细化对所获材料的利用限制;制止型网络监控应在技术侦查立法中得以增加,并对其划定适用范围,明确适用条件、非法适用的不利后果;对社会管理数据库的网络监控,应在确认其合法性的基础上,限制适用方式,放宽适用审批;对计算机信息系统的网络监控,应在将获取非内容信息的此类网络监控定位为技术侦查的基础上,放宽对其适用范围、适用条件、适用审批的限制。

From the perspective of combating crimes,network surveillance can be divided into pre-filing network surveillance and post-filing network surveillance.The former encompasses network surveillance of public data,network surveillance of private data,and preventive network surveillance;while the latter includes network surveillance of social management databases and network surveillance of computer information systems.In accordance with the principles of due process and proportionality,given the distinct applicability of various network surveillance methods in terms of their subjects,manners,targets,and contents,the measures and legal regulations for network surveillance cannot be generalized.The five aforementioned categories of network surveillance sequentially correspond to administrative law enforcement,technical reconnaissance,technical investigation,general compulsory investigation,and technical investigation,respectively.Currently,China’s relevant legislation has numerous shortcomings in regulating various types of network surveillance,including a lack of clear measure positioning and vague and inadequate application restrictions.Based on the principles of due process and proportionality,combined with the extent of infringement on civil rights by different types of network surveillance,distinct legal regulatory models should be established to improve the inadequacies of existing regulations.For network surveillance of public data,it is necessary to limit the applicable subjects,define the scope and manner of application,introduce an examination and approval system,and strengthen procedural connections with criminal proceedings.As for network surveillance of private data,the scope of application should be clarified,and restrictions on the use of obtained materials should be detailed.In terms of preventive network surveillance,it should be incorporated into technical investigation legislation,with limitations on its scope of application and clear conditions and adverse consequences of illegal application for its use.Regarding network surveillance of social management databases,the legitimacy should be confirmed,the manner of application should be restricted,and the approval process should be relaxed.Finally,for network surveillance of computer information systems,the narrow definition of network surveillance for obtaining non-content information should be positioned as technical investigation,and restrictions on the scope of application,conditions,and approval should be eased.