大数据侦查的行为规制主义路径:理念检视与规则优化  

Behavioural Regulationism Paths to Big Data Investigations:Conceptual Review and Rule Optimization

作　　者：詹建红[1] ZAN Jian-hong

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学法学院

出　　处：《当代法学》2024年第6期16-29,共14页Contemporary Law Review

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目“大数据侦查的程序性控制研究”(22YJA82031)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：大数据侦查是大数据技术与侦查活动的深度结合,它是人类社会信息化演进的必然结果。大数据技术的广泛应用和大数据侦查功能范畴的不断拓展,不仅导致侦查活动的形态发生了新的变化,还使得侦查活动的程序性控制体系暴露出结构性缺陷。面对这些挑战,以令状审查主义和权利保障主义为主导理念的传统控制路径,在司法和立法层面陷入了制度困局,而法律保留主义的控制主张也难以接受逻辑自洽性的检视。解决大数据侦查程序性控制问题的关键在于功能保留,防止大数据技术中的支配性要素被随意利用。为此,应将行为规制主义作为宏观路径的核心理念,立足于数据的采集、利用和校验这三个重要环节,明确大数据侦查中的技术行为规则,在对数据采集行为进行概念整合的基础上,围绕权利保障和外源控制确立数据采集控制规则,围绕分级控制和技术边界确立数据利用限缩规则,围绕真实性保障和可靠性保障确立数据内容校验规则,同时强化程序环节的动态控制和改进违法侦查的制裁逻辑,以实现大数据侦查程序性控制体系的同步升级。Big data investigation is an in-depth combination of big data technology and investigation activities.It is the inevitable result of the informatization evolution of human society.The wide application of big data technology and the continuous expansion of the functional scope of big data investigation not only leads to new changes in the form of investigative activities in the composition of the subject,action logic,coercive method,etc.,but also makes the procedural control system of investigative activities exposed structural defects that cannot be ignored.Firstly,the intervention of third-party subjects has changed the pattern of investigative power,leading to a weakening of the ability of traditional institutional power centers to control investigative activities.Secondly,the dominance of algorithms has revolutionized the logic of investigative action,with the procedural nodes of filing,initiating and concluding investigations becoming blurred,resulting in the loss of a grip on external control of investigative activities.Thirdly,the separation of fields makes the coercive methods of investigation seldom leave traces in physical space,and do not even have an immediate impact on the lives of citizens,thus making it very difficult to control big data investigation activities through ex post facto remedies.In the face of these challenges,the traditional control approach with the dominant philosophy of writ reviewism and rights protectionism is caught in an institutional quagmire at the judicial and legislative levels,and the opinion of legal retentionism is difficult to subject to the examination of logical self-consistency.The key to solving the problem of procedural control of big data investigation lies in functional retention,preventing the dominant elements of big data technology from being used at will in order to avoid the confusion of judicial logic with administrative and commercial logic.To this end,behavioral regulationism should be taken as the core philosophy of the macro approach,based on the three

关 键 词：大数据侦查 行为规制主义 数据采集控制规则 数据利用限缩规则 预防正义 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]