QQ数据的侦查取证问题研究

发布时间：2018-02-23 17:39

本文关键词： QQ数据扣押网络监听司法审查非法证据排除　出处：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：QQ作为使用最广泛的即时通信工具,已然成为证据信息的重要来源。与QQ数据侦查取证在刑事诉讼中日趋常态化形成鲜明对比的是,我国刑事诉讼法律体系中对应的制度供给却严重不足。《刑事诉讼法》仅仅确认了电子数据作为独立的法定证据种类,但是针对电子数据的侦查取证制度至今尚无系统性、可操作性的法律规定,导致司法实务中不规范、甚至违法的QQ侦查取证行为大量存在。从法律、技术维度深入剖析QQ数据内在规律,借鉴域外电子数据侦查取证有益经验,构建尽量适合我国刑事司法实际的QQ数据侦查取证制度,正是本文写作之初衷。本文除引言和结语外,正文共分为四个部分,约3.2万字。第一部分对QQ数据的概念和特性进行分析。QQ数据是QQ这种即时通信工具运行中形成的记录了有关案件事实信息的各种电磁介质。它的证据信息蕴含于数据之中,包括“通信数据”、“通信内容数据”。QQ数据的证据特性表现为以下四个方面:首先,QQ数据证明力取决于计算机软硬件系统环境,QQ数据取证具有高度技术依赖性。其次,QQ数据属于实物类证据,决定了所构建的程序性制裁机制只能是非法实物证据排除规则。再次,QQ数据证据载体与证据信息的可分离性,在一定程度上挑战了传统的实物类证据复制件(品)证明力弱于原件(物)的原则。最后,QQ数据与公民宪法权利密切相关,严重的违法取证会导致QQ数据失去证据能力。第二部分考察域外QQ数据侦查取证的制度设计。域外立法中虽无专门QQ数据侦查取证制度,但电子数据侦查取证制度已经比较完备。扣押、监听是两大法系电子数据取证的核心措施。扣押的启动均以令状主义为原则,以紧急情况、附随扣押、被扣押人同意三种无证扣押情形为例外,而大陆法系还设立了特有的事后确认扣押启动模式。在适用条件上,英美法系明确了扣押理由、证明标准,而大陆法系相对宽松,仅以经验判断或怀疑即可实施;在执行方式上,体现为直接提取式、命令提交式、搜查式三种类型。在救济程序上,主要为返还财产、赔偿损失、非法证据排除规则。对于监听的启动,两大法系均严格遵循令状主义原则,紧急情况下监听也要事后请求法官确认。在适用条件上,尽管存在价值取向、条件设置的差异,但都恪守必要性、比例、相关性三大侦查原则。在执行方式上,各国明确监听须与通信具有同步性,但是均将具体技术手段视为国家秘密,未予公开。在权利救济上,建立了信息保密、知情权、异议权、民事赔偿、非法证据排除规则等全方位的保障制度。第三部分剖析我国QQ数据侦查取证制度的现状与成因。当前的问题表现为:首先,缺乏系统性法律依据。涉及电子数据取证的法律寥寥数条,且均是模糊的、原则性规定。QQ数据与其他电子数据的侦查取证一样,面临着事实上的无法可依的境地。其次,整体水平较低。侦查机关提取数据的方式杂乱、不统一,提取数据不完整,影响了QQ数据在庭审中的认定。最后,无统一技术标准可供遵循。取证专业人员和标准化操作规程的缺乏,导致很多QQ数据证明效力弱、司法采信难。造成上述问题的原因主要在四个方面:一是刑事诉讼立法理念上重“人”轻“物”。搜查、扣押等对“物”的措施未被列入“强制措施”,导致对“物”之侦查取证制度不健全。二是程序法定原则未能彻底落实。QQ数据侦查取证之启动条件、执行方式、救济程序等均无法律可供遵循。三是强制侦查行为司法审查制度缺位。侦查取证沿用着自审自批自侦的模式,缺乏外部监督与制约。四是非法实物证据排除制度有待完善。法律的不明确、不具体,使非法实物证据排除程序的启动难、排除亦难,违法的QQ数据侦查取证行为难以被有效抑制。第四部分提出完善我国QQ数据侦查取证制度设想。以数据是否处于“网络传输状态”分别构建扣押(静态取证措施)、网络监听(动态取证措施)两大类QQ数据取证措施。完善扣押QQ数据:公安机关实施扣押由检察机关决定、检察机关实施的扣押由审判机关决定,并将紧急情况、附随扣押、被扣押人同意三种情形下的侦查机关自行决定作为补充;结合当前实际,为侦查机关设立宽松的扣押适用条件,并建立涉及国家秘密QQ数据的扣押豁免制度;以提取数据作为本质,确立“无损原则”,制订强制直接提取、搜查式提取、命令提交式提取的技术操作规程;建立信息保密制度,完善刑事赔偿程序,引入民事诉讼程序,完善非法证据排除规则,防止QQ数据扣押可能带来的负面影响。完善网络监听:参照扣押决定权之配置模式,建立严格的司法令状制度;比照英美法系或者德国标准,严格贯彻比例、必要性、相关性原则,限制网络监听适用;赋予知情权、控告权,并以此为基础引入民事赔偿,完善刑事赔偿、非法证据排除规则。
[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.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】