On the legitimacy of GPS location tracking and its legislative system

Abstract

[[abstract]]早期在追緝犯人或犯罪嫌疑人時大部分都是用尾隨、全天候視覺監控等類似之方法為之，但是隨著科技的不斷創新與日新月異，犯罪者之犯罪手段亦日趨越益，增加追緝的難度。其會為了躲避國內之檢、警、調等司法警察機關之追緝，可能會將其藏身處隱蔽在一些山林裡，難以用大量人力去追緝或跟監，故，為了更有效的偵查，司法警察機關可能需要仰賴及運用高科技定位技術做為犯罪偵查之手段或預防，例如使用全球定位系統(Global Positioning System簡稱GPS)之方式，來對人民進行追蹤或監控，藉由該方式來蒐集相關的不法事證。 惟在使用前述之科技做為偵查手段時，對於部分之善意第三人，在其憲法上所賦予他們的居住遷徙自由、秘密通訊自由或隱私權之基本權利均有可能造成侵害，如：「最高法院於106年12月4日做出一判決，係針對有關GPS偵查的判決，該判決明白地指出GPS偵查銀偵查機關可以連續多日、全天候持續而精確地掌握車輛及其使用人之位置、移動方向、速度及停留時間等活動行蹤，且追蹤範圍不受時空限制，亦不侷限於公共道路上，即使車輛進入私人場域，仍能取得車輛及其使用人之位置資訊，且經由所蒐集長期而大量之位置資訊進行分析比對，自可窺知車輛使用人之日常作息及行為模式，難謂非屬對於車輛使用者隱私權之重大侵害。且認為GPS係屬強制偵查，若無法律依據，自屬違法不被允許」。 因此在運用前述之科技做為犯罪偵查之手段時，需要有法律依據，才能符合憲法上或是法律上之規定，本文所著重之處會在於「全球定位系統Global Positioning System(以下簡稱GPS)」做為偵查手段時，我國現行法規中所訂之要件及程序是否完整?是否有明文規定?如無規定時司法警察機關所蒐集到之相關不法事證是否具證據能力，並進一步的參考各國之法律依據加以分析，並提出一套適合我國之法律，即是本文所要探討之重點所在。 Early in the pursuit of prisoners or suspects are mostly used to tail, all-weather visual monitoring and other similar methods, but with the continuous innovation of science and technology and rapid changes, the criminal means of the perpetrators are becoming more and more beneficial, increasing the difficulty of pursuit. In order to avoid the domestic detection, police, transfer and other judicial police agencies, may hide its hiding place in some mountains and forests, it is difficult to use a large number of manpower to pursue or follow the prison, therefore, in order to more effective investigation, judicial police may need to rely on and use high-tech positioning technology as a means of criminal investigation or prevention, For example, using the Global Positioning System (Global Positioning System) to track or monitor people by collecting relevant evidence of wrongdoing. Only in the use of the above-mentioned technology as a means of investigation may result in infringement of the fundamental rights of a third person who, in good faith, to their constitutionalright to freedom of residence, freedom of movement, freedom of confidential communication or right to privacy, such as: "Supreme Court 4, a judgment was made in response to a decision on GPS detection, which clearly stated that GPS investigation silver detection authorities can continuously and accurately grasp the location, direction of movement of the vehicle and its user for many days, 24 hours a day, 24 hours a day, The speed and length of stay and other activities, and the tracking range is not limited by time and space, is not limited to public roads, even if the vehicle into the private field, can still obtain the vehicle and its user location information, and through the collection of long-term and large number of location information analysis and comparison, from the voyeur vehicle user's daily activities and behavior patterns, It is difficult to say that it is not a major violation of the privacy rights of vehicle users. And think that GPS is a mandatory investigation, if there is no legal basis, self-inviolation is not allowed." Therefore, in the use of the above-mentioned technology as a means of criminal investigation, there is a legal basis to comply with the constitutional or legal provisions, the focus of this article will be "Global Positioning System global (GPS) As a means of investigation, is the elements and procedures set out in china's existing laws and regulations ? Is there an explicit ? If there is no provision, the judicial police organs collected the relevant illegal evidence whether there is evidence capacity, and further reference to the legal basis of various countries to analyze, and put forward a set of suitable for our country's law, that is, the focus of this paper to explore