摘要
法院调取通话记录和交警查阅复制当事人通讯记录是否侵犯了公民宪法上的通信自由和通信秘密,不仅要考虑宪法上通信自由和通信秘密的保护范围,也要考虑调取和查阅复制是否属于我国《宪法》第40条的检查行为。通话记录与通讯记录是否受通信秘密的保护要根据该记录存储的位置来定,存储在通信服务商处的通话记录、通讯记录属于通信秘密的保护范围,而存储在当事人设备上的通话记录、通讯记录,由于当事人可以掌控,不受通信秘密的保护,受当事人的隐私权或个人信息自决权的保护。法院调取通话记录和交警查阅复制通讯记录如果不涉及通信的内容或者并未对通信内容进行审查,不属于我国《宪法》第40条规定的检查行为,不需要满足"基于国家安全或者追查犯罪的需要、由公安机关或检察机关进行"这两项特殊法律保留的要求,但仍然受单纯法律保留的调整,即法院到通信服务商处调取通话记录、交警在通信服务商处查询复制当事人通讯记录需要获得法律的授权。地方性法规中规定交警查阅复制当事人通讯记录的真正问题在于违反了我国《宪法》第40条对通信自由和通信秘密的法律保留。
In deciding whether the acquisition of call record by a court and the consultation and copy of an involved person’s communication record by a traffic police violate the citizens’ freedom and privacy of communication,not only should the scope of the constitutional protection of freedom and privacy of communication be considered,but also whether the acquisition,consultation and copy belong to the inspection set forth in Article 40 of the Constitution of China. First of all,whether the call record and communication record are protected by privacy of communication depends on the location where the records are stored. The call record and communication record stored at the communication service provider is protected by the privacy of communication,while those stored in the involved person’s equipment are under the control of such person,so they are protected not by the privacy of communication but by the involved person’s right to privacy or right to self-determination of personal information. Secondly,if the acquisition of the call record by the court and the consultation and inspection of the communication record by the traffic police do not involve the content of the communication or review the content of the communication,they are not inspection set forth in Article 40 of the Constitution,so there is no need to satisfy the requirement of two special legal reservations that inspection shall be made by a public security organ or a procuratorial organ on basis of national security or the necessity of criminal investigation. However,they are still subject to adjustments by the purely legal reserve,that is,the acquisition of call record by the court from the communication service provider and consultation and copy of the investigatee’s communication record by the traffic police at the communication service provider need legal authorization. Therefore,the real problem in the local regulation that authorizes the traffic police to make consultation and copy of the involved person’s communication record is its v
出处
《政治与法律》
CSSCI
北大核心
2020年第8期107-119,共13页
Political Science and Law
基金
国家社科基金重大研究专项“以法规备案审查制度彰显社会主义核心价值观研究”(项目编号:19VHJ015)的阶段性成果
关键词
基本权利限制
通信秘密
检查
特殊法律保留
单纯法律保留
Restriction on Basic Rights
Privacy of Communication
Inspection
Special Legal Reservation
Purely Legal Reservation
