從干預概念探討偵查科技之運用與界限

The Utilization and Boundaries of Investigative Technology from the Concept of Intervention

偵查科技是偵查機關為了調查犯罪，透過科技設備或技術而採行的各種科技手段，可分為科技定位技術與科技蒐證技術。近年來偵查機關使用GPS定位追蹤器與M化車遭最高法院認定違法偵查，立法者遂於2024年在刑事訴訟法中增訂新型態的偵查科技，賦予偵查機關使用科技調查犯罪的授權依據。偵查科技多具有隱密性，在當事人不知情下進行，因此，在科技發展與人民權利保障之間，偵查機關為了達成犯罪調查任務，採取的干預手段性質產生了變化。隱密的偵查措施雖然沒有直接改變當事人的權利與義務，卻對不特定的人傳達了有可能會針對自己而產生的恐懼，個人為了適應社會規範而影響生活作息或改變行為模式，故不管是公開或隱密進行的科技手段，都是一種對權利的干預。此種類似強制的偵查科技對基本權的侵害程度有輕重之分，範圍可以是隱私權、一般人格權、資訊隱私權或資訊自決權、秘密通訊自由權及新興的資訊科技權。在法治國原則要求下，偵查機關的干預權有其界限，應遵守法律保留原則、法官保留原則、比例原則與明確性原則，以免過度侵害人民權利。

Investigation technology refers to various technological methods employed by criminal investigative agencies. It can be categorized into technological positioning techniques and technological evidence collection techniques. In recent years, investigative agencies using GPS tracking devices and IMSI-Catcher have been deemed illegal surveillance by the highest court, so lawmakers added a new form of investigative technology to the Code of Criminal Procedure in 2024, giving investigative agencies the basis for authorization to use technology to investigate crimes. Investigation technology is often secret and conducted without the knowledge of the parties involved. In the balance between technological development and the protection of human rights, the nature of intervention measures taken by investigative agencies has undergone changes. While covert investigative measures may not directly alter the rights and obligations of the individuals involved, they convey the possibility of being targeted, inducing fear among unidentified individuals. Individuals may adjust their lifestyles or change behavior patterns to adapt to societal norms. Whether conducted openly or covertly, these technological methods represent a form of interference with human rights. The degree of infringement on fundamental rights by such compulsory investigative technology varies, covering areas such as privacy rights, general personality rights, information privacy rights or autonomy, secret communication freedom, and information technology rights. Under the principle of the rule of law, the intervention authority of investigative agencies has limits and should adhere to principles such as legal reservation, judicial reservation, proportionality, and clarity to prevent excessive infringement on people's rights.