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:王泉树
机构地区:[1]贵州大学法学院,贵州 贵阳
出 处:《法学(汉斯)》2023年第4期1970-1974,共5页Open Journal of Legal Science
摘 要:进入信息时代,有关《公共调查法》的讨论中,需要解决的前提性问题是如何理解“调查权”。不同于技术侦查、刑事搜查等相似概念,调查权在主体、客体及行为上有其独特之处。相较于英国《2016调查权力法》对调查权体系的完善构建,国内呈现出立法体系散乱、概念模糊不清的问题,因此有必要对调查权的概念进行界定。通过解析英国调查权制度,评价其优势与劣势,阐释英国调查权制度设计对于解决我国调查权问题的借鉴意义。In the information age, the discussion on the “Public Investigation Law” has to be addressed as a precursor to the understanding of investigative power. Different from similar concepts such as technical investigation and criminal search, investigative power has its unique features in subject, object and behavior. Compared with the perfect construction of the investigatory power system in the UK’s 2016 Investigatory Powers Act, the domestic legislation system is disorganized and the concept is ambiguous. Therefore, it is necessary to define the concept of investigatory power. By analyzing the system of British investigation power, the advantages and disadvantages of British investigation power are appraising, and the reference of the system design of British investigation power is explained to solve the problem of Chinese investigation power.
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:216.73.216.170