防性通信資料存取之憲法界限──以歐盟儲備性資料存取指令（2006/24/EG）之發展為借鏡

Constitutional Boundary on Preventive Retention of Communication Data: Taking the Development of 2006/24/EC Directive as Example

歐盟於二○○六年制定歐盟2006/24/EG指令，透過積極立法，運用預先存取之電信及網路資料滿足防範重大犯罪之渴求，但亦引發與歐盟基本權利憲章第7條與第8條不相合致之議論；無獨有偶，我國通訊保障及監察法於二○一四年初進行增修，明文訂定國家機關基於犯罪偵查及證據蒐集之目的，向電信業者調取通信紀錄及通訊使用者資料之要件，上述規範在合憲性之檢證結果是否將殊途同歸，值得探究。本文首先就預防性通信資料存取可能涉及之基本權利進行類型化之分析，續以德國聯邦憲法法院與歐洲法院之判決觀察歐盟2006/24/EG指令發展之興替，並就我國現行之相應規範予以介析，思考其可能遭遇的憲法困境，最後，嘗試在探尋個人資料保護平衡點之路途上，提供個人的觀察與建議作為參考。

In the year of 2006, the European Union used progressive leg-islation to establish the 2006/24/EC Directive, using Retention of In-ternet Data and Communication Data to fulfill the need to prevent se-rious crimes. But this approach has caused debate over whether the Directive has breached the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU Art. 7 and Art. 8. Also, Taiwan’s “The Communication Security and Surveillance Act” has been amended in early 2014, explicitly regulat-ing the criteria to access communication records and communica-tions user’s information when State Agency investigate and collect evidence. Whether these respective regulations of EU and Taiwan may lead to the same result, is worth further research. This research will firstly analyze the categorization of possible fundamental rights related to preventive retention communication data. Then, by exam-ining the Judgments of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany and the Court of Justice of the EU, the application of EU Directive of 2006/24/EC will be observed. This study will also ana-lyze Taiwan’s current and similar regulations and ponder possible constitutional obstacles that could be encountered. At last, personal opinion will be provided, in hope to provide some observa-tion and advice on the path to find the balance point of personal data protection.