查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 論通訊保障及監察法「調取票」之創設
- 通訊保障及監察法之修正與評析
- 通訊監察之修法芻議--通訊保障及監察法之部份修正條文
- 美國通訊監察法制研究
- 特定明確原則與機動性通訊監察
- 從司法審查觀點論警察犯罪偵查
- 通訊監察「違反令狀原則」以及「另案監聽」在刑事證據法上之效果--評最高法院九八年度臺上字第一四九五號、九七年度臺上字第二六三三號及九七年度臺非字第五四九號三則判決
- 「第四屆學術與實務之對話--證據禁止之理論與實際」議題討論
- I am Listening to You--釋字第六三一號解釋、令狀原則及修正後通訊保障及監察法
- I am Listening to You--釋字第六三一號解釋、令狀原則及修正後通訊保障及監察法
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論通訊保障及監察法「調取票」之創設=A Study of the "Access Warrant" in the Communication Security and Surveillance Act |
---|---|
作 者 | 許家源; | 書刊名 | 靜宜法學 |
卷 期 | 3 2014.06[民103.06] |
頁 次 | 頁95-113 |
分類號 | 581.2324 |
關鍵詞 | 調取票; 令狀原則; 監聽; 通聯紀錄; Warrant; Eavesdrop; Freedom of communication; Freedom of correspondence; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 誠如週知,2014 年1 月14 日立法院火速通過「通訊保障及監察法」 修正案,新增了「調取票」此一令狀,希望藉此防止調取通訊紀錄之 情形過於氾濫。然而,此舉不僅立即引起檢警機關反彈,從立法過程 來看,更有流於報復性立法之嫌。 基於兼顧「保障」與「監察」之前提下,本文認為,本次修法之 結果,對現行實務作法雖無重大影響,但通訊紀錄與通訊內容之監察, 兩者性質不同、規範密度有別,尤其調取通訊紀錄之偵查作為,反而 與一般對物之搜索扣押類似,建議回歸刑事訴訟法上搜索扣押之規 範,並與個人資料保護法、電信法為整體性之思考,始為上策。 |
英文摘要 | The amendments of the Communication Security and Surveillance Act is made on January 14th, 2014. The addition of “access warrant” intends to prevent the excessive acquisition of communication records in criminal procedure. However, the change is against by prosecutors and the police and also viewed as “a legislation for revenge.” Under the principle of considering the security and surveillance, this study proposes that two different natures of the surveillance of communication records and information results in different regulated intensity. Also, the amendment is not influential to justice practice. Therefore, the acquisition of communication records alike general seize and search should be primarily regulated by the Criminal Procedure Law. Meanwhile, related articles of information protection in the Personal Information Protection Act and the Telecommunication Act should be amended as soon as possible. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。