《電子技術(shù)應(yīng)用》
您所在的位置:首頁 > 通信与网络 > 设计应用 > 网络犯罪抽样取证的实践困境与完善
网络犯罪抽样取证的实践困境与完善
网络安全与数据治理
刘宇浩
中国人民公安大学法学院
摘要: 信息网络时代,网络犯罪的海量证据引发证明困难的司法困境,抽样取证规则为化解网络犯罪海量证据取证困境提供了有益探索。然而抽样取证在实践中仍存在取证标准不明晰、取证程序设计不足、取证范围宽泛、被追诉人权利保障不健全等困境。对此,需要明确抽样取证的标准;程序设计上,需要从主体权限、审批程序、构建类型化抽样方法体系、非法抽样证据排除角度进行完善;同时需要对抽样取证的案件范围、证据范围、程序范围进行必要限缩;最后需要从知情权、参与权、异议权等角度加强被追诉人救济权保障。
關(guān)鍵詞: 网络犯罪 抽样取证 证明方法
中圖分類號:D925.2;D924.3文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識碼:ADOI:10.19358/j.issn.2097-1788.2024.06.010
引用格式:劉宇浩.網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪抽樣取證的實(shí)踐困境與完善[J].網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全與數(shù)據(jù)治理,2024,43(6):64-71.
The practical dilemma and improvement of cyber crime sampling and forensics
Liu Yuhao
Law School, People′s Public Security University of China
Abstract: In the age of information network, the massive evidence of cyber crime leads to the judicial dilemma of difficult proof. The rules of sampling forensics provide a beneficial exploration for resolving the dilemma of massive evidence of cyber crime. However, in the practice of sampling forensics, there are still some difficulties, such as unclear forensics standards, insufficient forensics program design, broad forensics scope, and imperfect protection of the rights of the accused. In this regard, it is necessary to clarify the standard of sampling evidence collection. In program design, it is necessary to improve the subject authority, examination and approval procedures, the construction of typed sampling method system, and the exclusion of illegal sampling evidence. At the same time, it is necessary to limit the scope of cases, the scope of evidence and the scope of procedures. Finally, it is necessary to strengthen the protection of the remedy right of the accused from the angles of the right to know, the right to participate and the right to dissent.
Key words : cyber crime; sampling evidence collection; proof method

引言

近年來,網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪案件數(shù)量在全部刑事案件總量中的占比呈逐年上升趨勢[1]。網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪已然成為我國主要犯罪類型之一,產(chǎn)生了海量證據(jù),然而司法資源又十分有限[2],對此,傳統(tǒng)直接完全收集與固定涉案全部證據(jù)的取證方式難以應(yīng)對數(shù)量上不斷滋生的網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪。抽樣取證是一種應(yīng)對取證難、證明難問題的有效手段。不同于“證據(jù)確實(shí)充分”的證明方式,刑事抽樣證明本質(zhì)上屬于概率推理,是一種數(shù)字化的信念表達(dá)與推論方法[3]。鑒于刑事抽樣取證作為新興事物,其概念界定尚未統(tǒng)一,本文贊同四川大學(xué)法學(xué)院萬毅教授的觀點(diǎn),即偵查人員通過科學(xué)方式,從數(shù)量較多的物品中抽取具有代表性的部分物品作為樣本證據(jù),據(jù)此證明所有物品性質(zhì)的證明方式[4]。簡言之,抽樣取證兼具取證方式和證明方法的雙重屬性。然而實(shí)踐中各地抽樣取證的實(shí)踐標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一,為統(tǒng)一抽樣取證的司法適用,最高人民法院、最高人民檢察院、公安部于2022年8月聯(lián)合出臺了《最高人民法院、最高人民檢察院、公安部關(guān)于辦理信息網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪案件適用刑事訴訟程序若干問題的意見》(法發(fā)〔2022〕23號)(以下簡稱《網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪程序意見》),首次對網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪抽樣取證進(jìn)行了規(guī)定。然而其規(guī)定的抽樣取證規(guī)則在網(wǎng)絡(luò)犯罪案件實(shí)踐適用時(shí),可操作性較弱,抽樣取證制度仍然有待完善。


本文詳細(xì)內(nèi)容請下載:

http://m.ihrv.cn/resource/share/2000006050


作者信息:

劉宇浩

(中國人民公安大學(xué)法學(xué)院,北京100038)


Magazine.Subscription.jpg

此內(nèi)容為AET網(wǎng)站原創(chuàng),未經(jīng)授權(quán)禁止轉(zhuǎn)載。

相關(guān)內(nèi)容