检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:郑曦[1] Zheng Xi
机构地区:[1]北京外国语大学法学院
出 处:《政法论坛》2020年第5期133-144,共12页Tribune of Political Science and Law
基 金:作者主持的国家社会科学基金青年项目“个人信息保护视域下的刑事诉讼领域被遗忘权研究”(编号:19CFX032)的阶段性成果。
摘 要:信息时代下,刑事诉讼中有确立个人信息权的需求与空间,但最大的难题在于个人信息权是否具有诉讼权利的身份。刑事诉讼中,个人信息权与诉讼权利不仅在权利结构、特征方面极为相似,而且有相关规范依据佐证其作为诉讼权利的合理性。既然个人信息权可以被纳入诉讼权利体系,则根据利益位阶分析法,可以将其定位为第三层级的诉讼权利,并根据此种诉讼权利层级划分的方式,妥善处理其与高层级、同层级和低层级诉讼权利的关系,从而在引入个人信息权之后保持刑事诉讼原有诉讼权利体系的稳定,促进个人信息权保障的顺利实现。In the information age, there is a need and space to establish personal information right in criminal proceedings, but the biggest problem lies in whether personal information right has the status of litigation rights. In criminal procedure, personal information right and litigation rights are not only very similar in terms of structure and characteristics, but also have relevant legislation basis to support the rationality of treating personal information right as a litigation right. Since the personal information right can be included in the litigation rights system, it can be positioned as a third-level litigation right according to the interest hierarchy analysis method. And according to this method of classification of litigation rights, the relationship between he personal information right and higher-level, peer-level, lower-level litigation rights can be properly handled with to maintain the stability of the original litigation rights system in criminal proceedings after the introduction of personal information right, and to promote the smooth realization of the protection of personal information right.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.49