个人信息保护视角下的刑事被遗忘权对应义务研究
|
摘要
信息社会催生出被遗忘权,在刑事司法领域延伸产生了刑事被遗忘权。刑事被遗忘权应受严格限制,研究刑事被遗忘权对应的义务对于理解此种权利有重要意义。刑事被遗忘权对应的义务主体包括刑事诉讼专门机关等国家机关、新闻媒体和社会公众。履行相应义务的法定条件为客观、主观和法律特殊保护等方面的原因使得个人数据的使用不合法或不合理。义务类型包括积极义务和消极义务,其中积极义务以封存和删除为主要内容,消极义务以不采集、不存储、不传递为主要内容。相应义务的履行需遵循特定程序,包括权利主体申请、法院审查与裁判、义务主体履行义务等。为保障义务主体履行对应义务,须设置不履行的违法责任,如民事责任、刑事责任、行政机关及其工作人员的法律责任、国家赔偿责任。
The information society has spawned the right to be forgotten,and its extension in criminal justice has produced the criminal right to be forgotten. The criminal right to be forgotten should be strictly restricted. The study of the obligation of the criminal right to be forgotten is of great significance for understanding that right. The subjects of the obligation corresponding to the criminal right to be forgotten include the state organs,the news media and the public. The statutory conditions for fulfilling the corresponding obligations refer to making the uses of personal data illegal or unreasonable out of objective or subjective reasons or with the special protection of the law. The types of obligations include positive and negative obligations,in which positive obligations are mainly sealing and deleting data,and negative obligations include refusing to collect,store ortransmit data. The performance of the corresponding obligations shall be subject to specific procedures,including the application by the subjects of right,the court review and judgment,and the performance by the subjects of obligation. To ensure that the subjects of obligation fulfill their corresponding obligations,liabilities for violation of law shall be set up for refusing to perform obligations,such as civil liability,criminal liability,legal liability of the administrative organ and its staff,and state compensation liability.
The information society has spawned the right to be forgotten,and its extension in criminal justice has produced the criminal right to be forgotten. The criminal right to be forgotten should be strictly restricted. The study of the obligation of the criminal right to be forgotten is of great significance for understanding that right. The subjects of the obligation corresponding to the criminal right to be forgotten include the state organs,the news media and the public. The statutory conditions for fulfilling the corresponding obligations refer to making the uses of personal data illegal or unreasonable out of objective or subjective reasons or with the special protection of the law. The types of obligations include positive and negative obligations,in which positive obligations are mainly sealing and deleting data,and negative obligations include refusing to collect,store ortransmit data. The performance of the corresponding obligations shall be subject to specific procedures,including the application by the subjects of right,the court review and judgment,and the performance by the subjects of obligation. To ensure that the subjects of obligation fulfill their corresponding obligations,liabilities for violation of law shall be set up for refusing to perform obligations,such as civil liability,criminal liability,legal liability of the administrative organ and its staff,and state compensation liability.
引文
[1]郑曦.大数据时代下刑事领域被遗忘权研究[J].求是学刊,2018(1):97-104.
[2]郑曦.“被遗忘”的权利:刑事司法视野下被遗忘权的适用[J].学习与探索,2016(4):60-66.
[3]沈宗灵.法理学[M].4版.北京:北京大学出版社,2014:66.
[4]孔祥承.诉讼模式下案卷移送制度研究[J].当代法学,2018(5):112-123.
[5]叶铁桥.“最残忍的采访”有违新闻伦理[N].中国青年报,2011-11-12(1).
[6]法国刑事诉讼法典[M].罗结珍,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2006:612.
[7]杜仪方.新《国家赔偿法》下刑事赔偿的司法实践研究[J].当代法学,2018(2):45-54.
[8]HOPE C.Criminal Records Bureau Errors Lead to Hundreds Being Branded Criminals[EB/OL].(2009-08-02)[2018-11-22].https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5962174/Criminal-Records-Bureau-errors-lead-to-hundreds-being-branded-criminals.html.
(1)该案被称为欧洲被遗忘权“第一案”。Google Spain SL,Google Inc.v Agencia Espa?ola de Protección de Datos,Mario Costeja González,C-131/12,EU:C:2014:317.
(2)对于该法案是否实现被遗忘权的适用存在争议,该法案内容可见于加利福尼亚州议会信息官方网站http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billN avC lient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB568,2018年11月22日访问。
(3)参见北京市第一中级人民法院民事判决书(2015)一中民终字第09558号。
(1)这些较有影响力的论文包括但不限于以下:杨立新、韩煦:《被遗忘权的中国本土化及法律适用》,载《法律适用》2015年第2期;万方:《终将被遗忘的权利---我国引入被遗忘权的思考》,载《法学评论》2016年第6期;张恩典:《大数据时代的被遗忘权之争》,载《学习与探索》2016年第4期;段卫利:《论被遗忘权的法律保护---兼谈被遗忘权在人格权谱系中的地位》,载《学习与探索》2016年第4期。
(1)如中国般在侦查阶段前专门设置立案这一独立程序的国家并不多见。
(2)《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第176条。
(1)美国加州《民事诉讼法》可见于美国加州立法信息网http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawC ode=CCP&division=&title=5.&part=3.&chapter=&article=,2018年11月22日访问。
[2]郑曦.“被遗忘”的权利:刑事司法视野下被遗忘权的适用[J].学习与探索,2016(4):60-66.
[3]沈宗灵.法理学[M].4版.北京:北京大学出版社,2014:66.
[4]孔祥承.诉讼模式下案卷移送制度研究[J].当代法学,2018(5):112-123.
[5]叶铁桥.“最残忍的采访”有违新闻伦理[N].中国青年报,2011-11-12(1).
[6]法国刑事诉讼法典[M].罗结珍,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2006:612.
[7]杜仪方.新《国家赔偿法》下刑事赔偿的司法实践研究[J].当代法学,2018(2):45-54.
[8]HOPE C.Criminal Records Bureau Errors Lead to Hundreds Being Branded Criminals[EB/OL].(2009-08-02)[2018-11-22].https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5962174/Criminal-Records-Bureau-errors-lead-to-hundreds-being-branded-criminals.html.
(1)该案被称为欧洲被遗忘权“第一案”。Google Spain SL,Google Inc.v Agencia Espa?ola de Protección de Datos,Mario Costeja González,C-131/12,EU:C:2014:317.
(2)对于该法案是否实现被遗忘权的适用存在争议,该法案内容可见于加利福尼亚州议会信息官方网站http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billN avC lient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB568,2018年11月22日访问。
(3)参见北京市第一中级人民法院民事判决书(2015)一中民终字第09558号。
(1)这些较有影响力的论文包括但不限于以下:杨立新、韩煦:《被遗忘权的中国本土化及法律适用》,载《法律适用》2015年第2期;万方:《终将被遗忘的权利---我国引入被遗忘权的思考》,载《法学评论》2016年第6期;张恩典:《大数据时代的被遗忘权之争》,载《学习与探索》2016年第4期;段卫利:《论被遗忘权的法律保护---兼谈被遗忘权在人格权谱系中的地位》,载《学习与探索》2016年第4期。
(1)如中国般在侦查阶段前专门设置立案这一独立程序的国家并不多见。
(2)《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》第176条。
(1)美国加州《民事诉讼法》可见于美国加州立法信息网http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawC ode=CCP&division=&title=5.&part=3.&chapter=&article=,2018年11月22日访问。