電信相關資料之存取與利用的基本權關連性（下）──德國聯邦憲法法院BVerfGE 125, 260與BVerfGE 130, 151判決評析

The Relatedness to Fundamental Rights of the Legislative Compulsion to Store the Relevant Telecommunications Data (II) －A Commentary and Analysis of the Judgments BVerfGE 125, 260 and BVerfGE 130, 151

本文以德國聯邦憲法法院兩則關於通信相關資料之儲存與利用的判決作為思考的線索與憑藉，探究國家立法強制電信服務提供者儲存用戶通信紀錄以及浮動IP位址之用戶資料，以供公權力機關於特定條件下利用的合憲性爭議。聯邦憲法法院強調個人資料之「蒐集—儲存—提供查詢—傳輸—利用」過程中，往往存有多種相互援引與串連的國家干預行為，必須依干預之標的與重點而分別受到合憲性控制，不得相互掩護；依此，經蒐集資料之利用，應嚴格受到資料蒐集目的拘束性原則之限制，且應具備資料提交與傳輸義務之特別授權規定，資料之蒐集與儲存權限規定尚不足以支持後續的資料提交、傳輸與利用權限；同理，國家立法強制電信服務提供者有依法將用戶之密碼、個人識別碼、解除鎖定密碼等安全防護碼提交於有權請求機關之義務，卻未明定請求機關對該等密碼資料之利用的法定要件，乃屬違反比例原則而違憲。我國就通信紀錄與通信使用者資料之存取利用的法制規範迄今仍相當粗陋，德國相關法治經驗應值得吾人參考。

This essay uses two judgments of the German Federal Constitutional Court as a clue to research the constitutional controversy of the legislative compulsory storage of the call detail records of telephony and internet traffic and transaction data and of the data of users with dynamic IP addresses imposed on telecommunications service providers to the public authorities’ usage under particular conditions. The Court reiterates that there are various intertwining and interconnecting interferences by the public authorities in the process of the “collection - storage - provision for consulting - transmission - usage” of the personal data, which should be constitutionally controlled respectively according to the objects and focuses of the interferences instead of covering each other. Therefore, the Court emphasizes that the usage of the collected data should be strictly limited to the principle of the constrained purpose of the data collection. Likewise, German Federal Constitutional Court rules that it violates the principle of proportionality for the legislation to oblige the telecommunications service providers to afford to the authorities concerned such security data as the passwords, PINs and PUKs of the users but not to stipulate the legal conditions for the usage of the security data by the authorities concerned. Legal regulations as to the access to the communications records and user data are still rough in Taiwan, so the relevant German legal developments are probably worth consulting.