英文摘要 |
According to the protection of privacy and information autonomy by the Constitution (refer to Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 603 and No. 689), the use of personal data from criminal procedures should aim to reach a balance between personal data protection and public interests, especially when it comes to «use beyond the purpose» (refers to «the use in non-criminal procedure in this case», including the use in other criminal cases and the use in non-criminal procedures), it shall also comply to the constitutional boundaries. However, there is nearly no provisions about the process and use of personal data in the Code of Criminal Procedure| aside from few exception such as article 33 paragraph 4 in the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates ''people who possess dossier and evidence regulated in paragraph 1 and 2 are prohibited from improper use.'', there is nearly no legal norms regulating the relevant issues. Since the German Federal Constitutional Court's case (BVerfGE 65, 1: Volkszählung), it has repeatedly reaffirmed that ''the people shall have the right to refrain from the state to obtain and use their personal data unrestrainedly, according to the Principle of Legal Reservation, the limitation of this right shall have an explicit act authorized by the law, and in particular shall comply with the restrictions of the Principle of Proportionality.» However, the German Criminal Procedure Law (StPO) had no special provisions for ''the use beyond the purpose'' of personal data. In 1994, due to the need to establish the ''Inter- Federal Prosecutor Procedural Register Database'' (ZStV), the new 8th part (also the last part of StPO) was added in order to comply with the constitution, to serve as the legal authorization for data intervention. In 2000, the provisions of the two chapters ''Providing reply and access to the case file, using the data beyond procedural purposes'' and ''Information Rules'' were further added. In 2017, chapter 4 of part 8 ''Protection and Application of Personal Data in Electronic Dossier and Evidence'' (§§ 496-499 StPO) was added and came into effect on January 1st 2018. There are still no references in the literature to introduce these comparative legal norms in Taiwan| the following is written as the form of German Commentary, explaining section to section from the first to the forth chapter (§§ 474-499 StPO) of the 8th part (title: ''Protection and Use of Personal Data'') of German Criminal Procedure Law, with the expectation to stipulate attentions to data protection in criminal procedure in domestic academia and the field of legal practice. |