網路犯罪偵查與我國關於網路服務提供者協助偵查法制之研究

Abstract

網路犯罪是「網路線上」的犯罪行為，犯罪行為發生時欠缺目擊證人可供查證，亦沒有具體的犯罪發生地與行兇兇器等線索可以蒐集，故不易清查過濾犯罪行為人身分；同時，網路犯罪行為所遺留之證據，均為不可目視的「電磁紀錄」，原本即不易蒐集，再加上近期通訊加密技術與點對點通訊的發展，更使得偵查人員面臨證據蒐集困難的窘境。相較於傳統網路犯罪偵查，二者間不僅偵查思惟截然不同，網路犯罪偵查流程顯然更具高複雜度、專業性與技術性。並且，由於網路行為具有「凡走過必留痕跡」的特性，網路犯罪偵查過程中，包括清查過濾階段之使用者資料或通信紀錄；證據調查階段之實施通訊監察等偵查作為，均須仰賴網路服務提供者提供偵查協助才能繼續後續偵查作為，甚至可以說，網路犯罪偵破與否的關鍵依存於網路服務提供者能否完全配合。 就我國目前法令而言，關於網路服務提供者協助偵查之規定，主要見諸於電信法、通訊保障及監察法與第二類電信管理規則等法規，惟前揭法規之規範對象為電信業者，能否一體適用到網路服務提供者，似有疑慮；另外，第二類電信事業管理規則加諸電信業者儲存及提供使用者資料、儲存及提供網路通信紀錄及建置網路通訊監察設備配合偵查人員實施通訊監察等責任，乃以法規命令規範限制或侵害使用者享有憲法保障之基本權利，更有違反憲法法律保留原則之疑慮，以致網路服務提供者為避免身陷訴訟之囹圄，不願也不能完全配合協助偵查。 因此，本文有鑑於網路服務提供者對於網路犯罪偵查之重要性及解決目前法令網路服務提供者無法完全配合協助偵查之問題，並參酌歐美各國均有相關協助偵查法制之立法例，認為確有制定獨立的網路服務提供者協助偵查法制之需要，以強化網路服務提供者協助偵查之責任，適度擴大偵查人員的偵查權力與偵查能力，解決日益泛濫的網路犯罪問題，還給所有網路使用者一個安全、便捷的網路空間。

The cybercrime is the criminal conduct taking place on the network line. Compared with the traditional crime, cybercrime possesses no eyewitness, concrete criminal occurrence ground and criminal machine as cybercrime happens. Furthermore, due to the cybercrime evidence is the electronic record can't be seen by one's eyes and the rapid development of the communication encryption and peer to peer communication, the investigator even can not collect the useful evidence. Therefore, the process of cybercrime investigation is more difficult to filter the suspect, collect evidence and carry out than traditional crime investigation. In other words, the concept of investigation is entirely different between traditional crime and cybercrime investigation; furthermore, the process of cybercrime investigation is obviously more complicated, professional and technical. In point of current cybercrime investigation, at first, the investigator has to acquire the user data or the communication record; then may wiretap the suspect's communication or identify the electronic evidence. All above investigative actions in the investigative stage must rely on the assistance of internet service provider; otherwise the investigation can not be continued. Even we can say that whether cybercrime investigation succeeds or not depends on whether internet service provider can offer complete investigative assistance. Though the current regulation concerning the assistance of the internet service provider for cybercrime investigation in ROC includes Telecommunications Act, the Communication Protection and Interception Act and Administrative Regulations on Type II Telecommunications Business, however, the object of these regulations is confined to telecommunications enterprise. Besides, Administrative Regulations on Type II Telecommunications Business is just an administrative order, it can not request telecommunications enterprise to store and provide the user data and communication record for cybercrime investigation without law authorization; otherwise it will violate the constitution concerning protecting the basic human rights. To sum up, in order not to violate the constitution and avoid the litigation, the internet service provider won't and also can't provide the help to investigate completely. Therefore, in view of the importance of the assistance of the internet service provider for cybercrime investigation and the problem that internet service provider can't provide complete investigative assistance according to current regulation and consulting along with some related regulation in Euro-American countries, I insist that it is urgent to establish an independent law concerning the assistance of internet service provider for cybercrime investigation. I expect we can increase the liability of internet service provider and expand the staff's investigatory power appropriately by way of this law in order to resolve the increasing cybercrime problem and restore a security and convenient internet space to all internet users.