發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-02-23 17:39

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： QQ數(shù)據(jù) 扣押 網(wǎng)絡(luò)監(jiān)聽 司法審查 非法證據(jù)排除　出處：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：QQ作為使用最廣泛的即時(shí)通信工具,已然成為證據(jù)信息的重要來源。與QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證在刑事訴訟中日趨常態(tài)化形成鮮明對比的是,我國刑事訴訟法律體系中對應(yīng)的制度供給卻嚴(yán)重不足。《刑事訴訟法》僅僅確認(rèn)了電子數(shù)據(jù)作為獨(dú)立的法定證據(jù)種類,但是針對電子數(shù)據(jù)的偵查取證制度至今尚無系統(tǒng)性、可操作性的法律規(guī)定,導(dǎo)致司法實(shí)務(wù)中不規(guī)范、甚至違法的QQ偵查取證行為大量存在。從法律、技術(shù)維度深入剖析QQ數(shù)據(jù)內(nèi)在規(guī)律,借鑒域外電子數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證有益經(jīng)驗(yàn),構(gòu)建盡量適合我國刑事司法實(shí)際的QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證制度,正是本文寫作之初衷。本文除引言和結(jié)語外,正文共分為四個(gè)部分,約3.2萬字。第一部分對QQ數(shù)據(jù)的概念和特性進(jìn)行分析。QQ數(shù)據(jù)是QQ這種即時(shí)通信工具運(yùn)行中形成的記錄了有關(guān)案件事實(shí)信息的各種電磁介質(zhì)。它的證據(jù)信息蘊(yùn)含于數(shù)據(jù)之中,包括“通信數(shù)據(jù)”、“通信內(nèi)容數(shù)據(jù)”。QQ數(shù)據(jù)的證據(jù)特性表現(xiàn)為以下四個(gè)方面:首先,QQ數(shù)據(jù)證明力取決于計(jì)算機(jī)軟硬件系統(tǒng)環(huán)境,QQ數(shù)據(jù)取證具有高度技術(shù)依賴性。其次,QQ數(shù)據(jù)屬于實(shí)物類證據(jù),決定了所構(gòu)建的程序性制裁機(jī)制只能是非法實(shí)物證據(jù)排除規(guī)則。再次,QQ數(shù)據(jù)證據(jù)載體與證據(jù)信息的可分離性,在一定程度上挑戰(zhàn)了傳統(tǒng)的實(shí)物類證據(jù)復(fù)制件(品)證明力弱于原件(物)的原則。最后,QQ數(shù)據(jù)與公民憲法權(quán)利密切相關(guān),嚴(yán)重的違法取證會(huì)導(dǎo)致QQ數(shù)據(jù)失去證據(jù)能力。第二部分考察域外QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證的制度設(shè)計(jì)。域外立法中雖無專門QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證制度,但電子數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證制度已經(jīng)比較完備�？垩骸⒈O(jiān)聽是兩大法系電子數(shù)據(jù)取證的核心措施。扣押的啟動(dòng)均以令狀主義為原則,以緊急情況、附隨扣押、被扣押人同意三種無證扣押情形為例外,而大陸法系還設(shè)立了特有的事后確認(rèn)扣押啟動(dòng)模式。在適用條件上,英美法系明確了扣押理由、證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn),而大陸法系相對寬松,僅以經(jīng)驗(yàn)判斷或懷疑即可實(shí)施;在執(zhí)行方式上,體現(xiàn)為直接提取式、命令提交式、搜查式三種類型。在救濟(jì)程序上,主要為返還財(cái)產(chǎn)、賠償損失、非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則。對于監(jiān)聽的啟動(dòng),兩大法系均嚴(yán)格遵循令狀主義原則,緊急情況下監(jiān)聽也要事后請求法官確認(rèn)。在適用條件上,盡管存在價(jià)值取向、條件設(shè)置的差異,但都恪守必要性、比例、相關(guān)性三大偵查原則。在執(zhí)行方式上,各國明確監(jiān)聽須與通信具有同步性,但是均將具體技術(shù)手段視為國家秘密,未予公開。在權(quán)利救濟(jì)上,建立了信息保密、知情權(quán)、異議權(quán)、民事賠償、非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則等全方位的保障制度。第三部分剖析我國QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證制度的現(xiàn)狀與成因。當(dāng)前的問題表現(xiàn)為:首先,缺乏系統(tǒng)性法律依據(jù)。涉及電子數(shù)據(jù)取證的法律寥寥數(shù)條,且均是模糊的、原則性規(guī)定。QQ數(shù)據(jù)與其他電子數(shù)據(jù)的偵查取證一樣,面臨著事實(shí)上的無法可依的境地。其次,整體水平較低。偵查機(jī)關(guān)提取數(shù)據(jù)的方式雜亂、不統(tǒng)一,提取數(shù)據(jù)不完整,影響了QQ數(shù)據(jù)在庭審中的認(rèn)定。最后,無統(tǒng)一技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)可供遵循。取證專業(yè)人員和標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化操作規(guī)程的缺乏,導(dǎo)致很多QQ數(shù)據(jù)證明效力弱、司法采信難。造成上述問題的原因主要在四個(gè)方面:一是刑事訴訟立法理念上重“人”輕“物”。搜查、扣押等對“物”的措施未被列入“強(qiáng)制措施”,導(dǎo)致對“物”之偵查取證制度不健全。二是程序法定原則未能徹底落實(shí)。QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證之啟動(dòng)條件、執(zhí)行方式、救濟(jì)程序等均無法律可供遵循。三是強(qiáng)制偵查行為司法審查制度缺位。偵查取證沿用著自審自批自偵的模式,缺乏外部監(jiān)督與制約。四是非法實(shí)物證據(jù)排除制度有待完善。法律的不明確、不具體,使非法實(shí)物證據(jù)排除程序的啟動(dòng)難、排除亦難,違法的QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證行為難以被有效抑制。第四部分提出完善我國QQ數(shù)據(jù)偵查取證制度設(shè)想。以數(shù)據(jù)是否處于“網(wǎng)絡(luò)傳輸狀態(tài)”分別構(gòu)建扣押(靜態(tài)取證措施)、網(wǎng)絡(luò)監(jiān)聽(動(dòng)態(tài)取證措施)兩大類QQ數(shù)據(jù)取證措施。完善扣押QQ數(shù)據(jù):公安機(jī)關(guān)實(shí)施扣押由檢察機(jī)關(guān)決定、檢察機(jī)關(guān)實(shí)施的扣押由審判機(jī)關(guān)決定,并將緊急情況、附隨扣押、被扣押人同意三種情形下的偵查機(jī)關(guān)自行決定作為補(bǔ)充;結(jié)合當(dāng)前實(shí)際,為偵查機(jī)關(guān)設(shè)立寬松的扣押適用條件,并建立涉及國家秘密QQ數(shù)據(jù)的扣押豁免制度;以提取數(shù)據(jù)作為本質(zhì),確立“無損原則”,制訂強(qiáng)制直接提取、搜查式提取、命令提交式提取的技術(shù)操作規(guī)程;建立信息保密制度,完善刑事賠償程序,引入民事訴訟程序,完善非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則,防止QQ數(shù)據(jù)扣押可能帶來的負(fù)面影響。完善網(wǎng)絡(luò)監(jiān)聽:參照扣押決定權(quán)之配置模式,建立嚴(yán)格的司法令狀制度;比照英美法系或者德國標(biāo)準(zhǔn),嚴(yán)格貫徹比例、必要性、相關(guān)性原則,限制網(wǎng)絡(luò)監(jiān)聽適用;賦予知情權(quán)、控告權(quán),并以此為基礎(chǔ)引入民事賠償,完善刑事賠償、非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則。
[Abstract]:QQ as the most widely used instant communication tool, has become an important source of evidence. QQ data and investigation of evidence in criminal proceedings is normalized in stark contrast, China's legal system in criminal litigation system corresponding to the supply is seriously insufficient. The Criminal Procedure Law > just confirmed electronic data as independent legal a kind of evidence, but according to the electronic data investigation system has no systematic, operational rules, resulting in non-standard judicial practice, and even illegal investigation. There are a lot of QQ from the law, technology dimension in-depth analysis of internal rules of QQ data, extraterritorial experience of electronic data investigation, construction of QQ the data investigation system to fit our criminal judicial practice, it is the original intention of writing this paper. Besides the introduction and conclusion, the text is divided into four parts, About 3.2 words. By analysis of.QQ QQ data is the instant communication tool in the operation of the formation of a variety of electromagnetic media recording the relevant facts of the case information in the first part of the concept and characteristics of the QQ data. It is evidence of information inherent in the data, including data communication "," proof characteristics of communication content data of.QQ data for the following four aspects: first, the QQ data proved that stress depends on the computer software and hardware environment of the system, QQ data forensics is highly technology dependent. Secondly, QQ data belongs to the physical evidence, only procedural sanctions mechanism determines the illegal physical evidence exclusion rules. Thirdly, QQ data carrier evidence and evidence the information of the separability, to a certain extent the physical evidence challenges the traditional copy (goods) that is weak on the original (object) principle. Finally, the QQ data and the constitutional right of Close, serious illegal evidence will cause QQ data lost the evidence ability. The second part introduces the system design of QQ data investigation. The foreign legislation had no special QQ data investigation system, but the electronic data investigation system has been relatively complete. Seizure monitoring is the core measure of two legal systems of electronic data forensics. The seizure of the start the warrant for the principle, in an emergency, accompanying the seizure, seizure of people agree with the three undocumented seizure cases as an exception, while the civil law has also established a special post to confirm seizure start mode. In the application of the conditions, the Anglo American law system clear seizure reason, standard of proof, and the continental law system is relatively loose, only to experience or suspicion can be implemented; in the implementation of the way, reflects the direct extraction, in order to search, type three types. The relief procedure, mainly for the return of property, compensation for losses And the exclusionary rule. For monitoring the start, the two legal systems are strictly follow the writ principle, emergency monitoring should also ask the judge to confirm later. In the application of the conditions, despite the differences in value orientation, setting up the conditions, but with the necessity, the proportion of correlation three investigation in the mode of implementation principle. All countries must have clear monitoring, synchronization and communication, but the specific technical means as state secrets, not publicly. On the right remedy, establish the confidentiality of information, right to know, the right to dissent, civil compensation, illegal evidence exclusion rules such as a full range of security system. The third part analyzes the status quo and cause of China QQ data investigation system. The performance of the problem: first, the lack of systematic legal basis. The law only relates to electronic data forensics number, and are fuzzy, the principle of.QQ data and other provisions Electronic data investigation, in fact facing lawless situation. Secondly, the overall level is low. The investigation organ extraction method of data extraction is not uniform, messy, incomplete data, affected the identification of QQ data in the trial. Finally, no unified technical standards for the lack of operating procedures to follow. Forensics professionals and standards, resulting in a lot of QQ data to prove the effectiveness of the weak, the judicial adoption difficult. The reasons leading to these problems mainly in four aspects: one is the legislative idea of criminal prosecution "" light "material." search, seizure of "property" measures are not included in the "measures". Due to the "object" of the investigation system is not perfect. The two is the principle of statutory procedures failed to fully implement the starting conditions,.QQ data investigation execution, relief procedures are no law to follow. The three is the compulsory investigation for judicial trial Check system absence. Investigation followed the self examination from the group investigation mode, the lack of external supervision and restriction. The four is the exclusion of illegal material evidence system needs to be improved. The law is not clear, not specific, the procedure of exclusion of illegal physical evidence exclusion also difficult, difficult to start, the number of QQ according to the illegal investigation difficult is suppressed effectively. The fourth part puts forward to perfect our QQ data investigation system envisaged. The data is in the "network" were constructed for seizure (static evidence measures), network monitoring (dynamic forensics measures) measures of two kinds of QQ data forensics. Improve the seizure of QQ data: the public security organs to implement the arrest decision by the procuratorial organs the implementation of the procuratorial organs seizure decided by the judicial organ, and an emergency, accompanying the seizure, detention of people agree with the three case investigation authorities to decide as a supplement; combined with the current reality, as the investigation machine Created loose seizure conditions, and the establishment of the seizure involving state secrets QQ data to extract the data as the exemption system; nature, establish "lossless" principle, the mandatory direct search type extraction, extraction, ordered to submit technical operation type extraction; the establishment of information security system, perfect the procedure of criminal compensation, the introduction of civil litigation the program, improve the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence, to prevent the seizure of QQ data may produce negative effects. To improve the network monitoring according to the right decision seized configuration mode, establish a strict judicial writ system; according to the Anglo American law system or the German standard, strictly implement the proportion, necessity, principle of relativity, limitation of network monitoring; give the right to know, Sue right, and on the basis of the introduction of civil compensation, criminal compensation, exclusionary rule.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 呂廣倫;羅國良;劉雅玲;王鋒永;馮黔剛;朱晶晶;;《關(guān)于辦理刑事案件排除非法證據(jù)若干問題的規(guī)定》理解與適用[J];人民檢察;2010年16期

2 王彬;;比較法視野下的監(jiān)控型秘密偵查研究[J];河北法學(xué);2010年05期

3 楊宇冠;;刑事強(qiáng)制措施適用原則的比較考察[J];人民檢察;2007年14期

4 孫長永;強(qiáng)制偵查的法律控制與司法審查[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2005年05期

5 許榕生;;國際計(jì)算機(jī)取證的操作規(guī)程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化動(dòng)態(tài)[J];金融電子化;2003年09期

6 萬毅;西方國家刑事偵查中的技術(shù)偵查措施探究[J];上海公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);1999年04期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 李明;即時(shí)通信痕跡發(fā)現(xiàn)與線索綜合[D];同濟(jì)大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號：1527018