《電子技術(shù)應(yīng)用》
您所在的位置:首頁(yè) > 其他 > 設(shè)計(jì)應(yīng)用 > 論我國(guó)個(gè)人信息刪除權(quán)的雙重限制模式
論我國(guó)個(gè)人信息刪除權(quán)的雙重限制模式
網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全與數(shù)據(jù)治理 8期
馬瑞聰
(中國(guó)政法大學(xué)民商經(jīng)濟(jì)法學(xué)院,北京100091)
摘要: 在信息主體與信息處理者的利益衡平中,信息主體的刪除權(quán)存在限制不足的問(wèn)題。當(dāng)刪除權(quán)的行使與公眾知情權(quán)、言論自由等公共利益發(fā)生沖突,或與信息處理者的利益損失顯著失衡時(shí),我國(guó)刪除權(quán)的限制規(guī)則存在規(guī)范供給不足的問(wèn)題。我國(guó)刪除權(quán)的限制規(guī)則采雙重限制模式,其中刪除權(quán)的形成限制以比例原則為指引,刪除權(quán)的行使限制以禁止權(quán)利濫用原則為指引。通過(guò)借鑒GDPR和BDSG中的刪除權(quán)限制規(guī)則,運(yùn)用解釋和類推適用的方法對(duì)我國(guó)刪除權(quán)的限制規(guī)則進(jìn)行完善。
中圖分類號(hào):D923.8
文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼:A
DOI:10.19358/j.issn.2097-1788.2023.08.005
引用格式:馬瑞聰.論我國(guó)個(gè)人信息刪除權(quán)的雙重限制模式[J].網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全與數(shù)據(jù)治理,2023,42(8):28-33.
The dual restriction model of the right to erasure in China
Ma Ruicong
(Civil, Commercial and Economic Law School, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing 100091, China)
Abstract: In the balance of interests between information subjects and information processors, there are insufficient restrictions on the right of information subjects to delete. When the exercise of the right to delete conflicts with public interests such as the public′s right to know and freedom of speech, or is significantly out of balance with the loss of interests of information processors, China′s restriction rules for the right to delete have the problem of insufficient regulation and supply. China′s restriction rules on the right to delete adopt a dual restriction model, in which the formation and restriction of the right to delete is guided by the principle of proportionality, and the exercise of the right to delete is guided by the principle of prohibition of abuse of rights. By drawing on the rules on the restriction of the right to delete in the GDPR and BDSG, the methods of interpretation and analogy are used to improve the restriction rules of the right to delete in China.
Key words : right to erasure; limitation; principle of proportionality; prohibition of abuse of rights

0    引言

在數(shù)字時(shí)代,信息主體與信息處理者之間的事實(shí)不平等關(guān)系受到立法者的廣泛關(guān)注。為使信息主體擺脫在信息處理活動(dòng)中的弱勢(shì)地位,維護(hù)信息主體的人格尊嚴(yán)與人格自由,《中華人民共和國(guó)個(gè)人信息保護(hù)法》(以下簡(jiǎn)稱“《個(gè)保法》”)在《中華人民共和國(guó)民法典》(以下簡(jiǎn)稱“《民法典》”)基礎(chǔ)上建構(gòu)了信息主體的權(quán)利體系,個(gè)人信息刪除權(quán)便是其中之一。個(gè)人信息刪除權(quán)對(duì)于實(shí)現(xiàn)信息自決、維護(hù)個(gè)人信息的完整和準(zhǔn)確具有重要意義,但也因?yàn)槭艿叫畔⒅黧w權(quán)益傾斜保護(hù)的理念影響,使得我國(guó)法對(duì)個(gè)人信息刪除權(quán)的建構(gòu)存在限制不足的問(wèn)題,具體表現(xiàn)為過(guò)度保護(hù)私人權(quán)益,而忽視信息承載的公共和社會(huì)利益。如此單一向度的立法不僅無(wú)利于保護(hù)個(gè)人信息背后的實(shí)體利益,也會(huì)阻礙個(gè)人信息的流動(dòng)和利用。在信息主體行使刪除權(quán)損害公共利益或者導(dǎo)致信息處理者的利益嚴(yán)重受損時(shí),刪除權(quán)的限制規(guī)則發(fā)揮著重要的利益衡平功能。如表1所示,與歐盟《通用數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)條例》(GDPR)和德國(guó)《聯(lián)邦數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)法》(BDSG)相比,我國(guó)刪除權(quán)的限制規(guī)則有待完善。本文欲以我國(guó)現(xiàn)行刪除權(quán)的限制規(guī)則存在的實(shí)踐和規(guī)范問(wèn)題為基礎(chǔ),以《民法典》和《個(gè)保法》的基本原則為指引,合理參考比較法的立法經(jīng)驗(yàn),運(yùn)用法律解釋、類推適用的方法對(duì)現(xiàn)行規(guī)則進(jìn)行完善。



本文詳細(xì)內(nèi)容請(qǐng)下載:http://ihrv.cn/resource/share/2000005463




作者信息:

馬瑞聰

(中國(guó)政法大學(xué)民商經(jīng)濟(jì)法學(xué)院,北京100091)


微信圖片_20210517164139.jpg

此內(nèi)容為AET網(wǎng)站原創(chuàng),未經(jīng)授權(quán)禁止轉(zhuǎn)載。