| Today,with the rapid development of the digital age and the increasing development of information technology,the survival and development of human beings in society has produced enormous changes.Information has brought great convenience to people’s lives,and at the same time,cybercrime is taking place using information technology to circumvent traditional means of investigation.As one of the main types of evidence in China,electronic data is an important means of criminal investigation and litigation in China,and is currently the most powerful tool in the fight against crime,as well as the most important evidence for determining the facts of a crime.In order to collect evidence,determine criminal facts and combat crime,the investigating authorities are using information technology to investigate an increasing range of cases,while the risk of infringing on citizens’ legitimate rights and interests due to the application of technology infringing on privacy and trafficking in information is also increasing.In the new era of comprehensive rule of law,to meet the requirements of "judicial fairness and justice",judicial work should not only pursue the purpose of punishing crimes,but also make the people feel fair in every case,that is,procedural fairness.This article takes the constitutional and criminal procedure law principle of "human rights protection" as the starting point,and takes the citizens’ right to information protection and the protection of evidence as the premise,and starts from every procedural detail to clarify the boundary between public and private rights;draws on foreign legislative references and their significance,with a view to seeking the compatibility between the use of information technology,big data for investigation and It also proposes to further promote the standardization of criminal electronic data forensics by taking the necessity of public interest litigation by procuratorial organs to intervene in the protection of personal information on the Internet as an example.The full paper contains four parts.In the first part,the 18 th batch of guiding cases of the Supreme Prosecutor,Zhang Kemin and 52 others in the case of internet telecommunication fraud,is introduced and analysed as criminal electronic data and the issues related to the protection of personal information in its forensics,which raises questions for the following specific elaboration.The second part focuses on the state of protection of personal information in criminal electronic data forensics in China.The main legislative and judicial problems are presented,and the main difficulties in the protection of personal information in electronic data forensics are further analysed by combining relevant cases.In the third part,we examine the legislation on the protection of personal information in criminal electronic data forensics in foreign countries and its significance.Through the analysis of the relevant legislation in foreign countries,it aims to provide legislative reference for solving the problem of electronic data extraction and personal information protection in China.In the fourth part,it proposes countermeasures to solve the difficult problems in electronic data extraction and personal information protection.The first part proposes measures to improve the regulation of the extraction procedure,the formulation of the personal information protection law and other measures to protect personal information to build a perfect personal information protection system.Finally,from the perspective of the new provision on the intervention of prosecutorial public interest litigation in the field of personal information protection,the reasons for this,the problems to be solved,the specific ways of protection,and finally the suggestions and solutions to strengthen the protection of personal information at the procedural level are elaborated.Going forward,we should clarify the importance of the status of the right to personal information and strengthen the protection of citizens’ information rights by strengthening judicial review and regulating evidentiary standards,as well as establishing a monitoring mechanism.At the same time,the collection of electronic data should be standardised to achieve justice and fairness in handling cases against citizens,with personal information protection at the centre. |
