刑事诉讼中跨境电子数据的审查  

The Examination of Cross-border Data in Criminal Proceedings

作　　者：陈苏豪 Chen Suhao

机构地区：[1]南京审计大学法学院

出　　处：《地方立法研究》2023年第3期98-112,共15页Local Legislation Journal

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“国际刑事司法合作中的证据问题研究”(20YJC820007)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：在数字时代,跨境电子数据审查遭遇困境。新技术运用拓展了“跨境”范畴,而既有规则并未就跨境因素识别提供明确指引,采纳单方获取的电子数据,可能引发司法主权方面的争议。非接触式取证常态化对电子数据鉴真提出技术挑战,而取证规则缺乏权利保障内核的现状,阻碍了将数据权利保障要求转化为证据能力判断标准,在跨境场合予以机械适用无法充分保障被追诉人权利,还会降低其他国家提供协助的意愿。更深层的制约因素是数据主权国际争议及权利保障国别差异,短期内难以达成根本性解决方案。当前,应以数据储存地作为识别跨境因素的标准,取证程序不符合国际刑事司法协助要求的跨境电子数据不能作为定案的根据,但具体适用需保持灵活性;持续完善技术性鉴真规则,并着力构建具有国际认可度的技术性标准;对通过司法协助渠道所获电子数据采用双重审查模式,以被追诉人自愿性保障为切入点,逐渐由侧重真实性走向证据性权利的全面保障。In the digital age,there exist several challenges in the examination of cross-border data.The use of new technologies has expanded the scope of“cross-border”,while existing rules do not provide clear guidance on the identification of cross-border factors,and the admissibility of unilaterally obtained digital data may lead to disputes over judicial sovereignty.The normalization of non-contact depositions poses a technical challenge to electronic data authentication,while the lack of a right-protection essence in the evidence-gathering rules hinders the transformation of data rights protection requirements into evidential admissibility tests.The mechanical application of these rules in cross-border circumstances cannot adequately protect the rights of the accused and will reduce the willingness of other countries to assist.Deeper contributing factors are the international controversy over data sovereignty and the country-specific differences in the protection of rights,which are difficult to be fundamentally resolved in a short term.As an intermediate response,the place of data storage should be used as a test for identifying cross-border factors,and cross-border digital data whose gathering procedures do not comply with the requirements of international criminal judicial assistance cannot be used as basis for conviction.A moderate degree of flexibility should also be maintained.At the same time,it is desirable to continuously improve technical authentication rules and focus on building technical standards with international recognition,apply a dual-review model to digital data obtained through judicial assistance,adopt the voluntary guarantee of the accused as a starting point,and gradually move from a focus on authenticity to a comprehensive guarantee of evidentiary rights.

关 键 词：电子数据 跨境 证据能力 司法主权 基本权利 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]