论文部分内容阅读
2013年修改后《刑事诉诉法》专节规定技术侦查措施,内含于其中的监听之必要性与正当性自得到立法确认毋庸置疑。但是,刚刚合法化的监听立法仍然稚嫩,尤其是如何在手段合法化后进行有效管控不致让其成潘多拉魔盒人人自危、尽量在保护私权与打击犯罪两大价值取向之间取得平衡,自台湾关说案和美国棱镜门事件之后,更成为各界普遍关注的焦点。监听鼻祖美国和监听规范相对完善的台湾仍会在运行中走样,不得不让人更深入审视监听制度之魔性。一项制
There is no doubt that the necessity and legitimacy of the technical investigation measures stipulated in the special section of the Criminal Procedure Law amended in 2013 has been legislated since it was enacted. However, the newly legalized monitoring legislation is still immature. In particular, how to effectively control after the legalization of the law will not make it a man at a loss to the Pandora’s Box and try his best to strike a balance between the two major values of protecting private rights and fighting crime Since the case of Taiwan Customs and the Prism Gate incident in the United States, it has become the focus of attention of all walks of life. Listen to the originator of the United States and monitoring the relative standard of Taiwan is still running in aliasing, had to make a more in-depth look at the monitoring system of the magic. A system