Editorial: A trialogue on regulating data-driven criminal procedure

Maša Galič, Lonneke Stevens, Bert-Jaap Koops
{"title":"Editorial: A trialogue on regulating data-driven criminal procedure","authors":"Maša Galič, Lonneke Stevens, Bert-Jaap Koops","doi":"10.1177/20322844231213484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This editorial introduces a special issue on the challenges of regulating data-driven criminal investigations, in light of the interplay – or rather, the lack thereof – between criminal procedure law and data protection law. The aim is to bring together scholars from both fields, to facilitate mutual understanding and to present ideas on better aligning these bodies of law to form a comprehensive normative framework. In data-driven investigations, police typically assemble large data sets to build an information position, followed by automated analysis to detect patterns and find evidence of potential crimes. The shift from traditional targeted, “case-seeks-evidence” investigations to data-driven untargeted, “evidence-seeks-case” investigations challenges the current normative framework. Discussing this challenge and the insights offered by the six contributions to this special issue, the authors identify multiple problems: people in criminal law lack knowledge of and therefore undervalue data protection law; data subject rights do not function well in the criminal procedure context; there may be an increasing emphasis on instrumentality in criminal law, at the cost of legal protection; criminal law strongly focuses on legal protection of suspects, particularly during trial, and does not cope well with investigations that never end up in court, nor with the protection of innocent citizens whose data are now also pervasively processed as by-catch in criminal investigations; and the law has relatively strong norms on data collection, but not on data analysis. The way forward lies in evolving towards a system that does not only protect suspects and victims but that systematically incorporates the rights of innocent thirds; developing an integrated and conclusive system of data processing rules in law enforcement, including data analysis and on-going reuse of data; and establishing a system of supervision that is adequately equipped to deal with the new reality of data-driven criminal procedure.","PeriodicalId":448100,"journal":{"name":"New Journal of European Criminal Law","volume":"46 ","pages":"423 - 433"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Journal of European Criminal Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844231213484","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This editorial introduces a special issue on the challenges of regulating data-driven criminal investigations, in light of the interplay – or rather, the lack thereof – between criminal procedure law and data protection law. The aim is to bring together scholars from both fields, to facilitate mutual understanding and to present ideas on better aligning these bodies of law to form a comprehensive normative framework. In data-driven investigations, police typically assemble large data sets to build an information position, followed by automated analysis to detect patterns and find evidence of potential crimes. The shift from traditional targeted, “case-seeks-evidence” investigations to data-driven untargeted, “evidence-seeks-case” investigations challenges the current normative framework. Discussing this challenge and the insights offered by the six contributions to this special issue, the authors identify multiple problems: people in criminal law lack knowledge of and therefore undervalue data protection law; data subject rights do not function well in the criminal procedure context; there may be an increasing emphasis on instrumentality in criminal law, at the cost of legal protection; criminal law strongly focuses on legal protection of suspects, particularly during trial, and does not cope well with investigations that never end up in court, nor with the protection of innocent citizens whose data are now also pervasively processed as by-catch in criminal investigations; and the law has relatively strong norms on data collection, but not on data analysis. The way forward lies in evolving towards a system that does not only protect suspects and victims but that systematically incorporates the rights of innocent thirds; developing an integrated and conclusive system of data processing rules in law enforcement, including data analysis and on-going reuse of data; and establishing a system of supervision that is adequately equipped to deal with the new reality of data-driven criminal procedure.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社论:关于规范数据驱动的刑事诉讼程序的试论
这篇社论介绍了一个特刊,主题是根据刑事诉讼法和数据保护法之间的相互作用--或者说,缺乏相互作用--规范数据驱动的刑事调查所面临的挑战。本特刊旨在汇集这两个领域的学者,促进相互理解,并就如何更好地协调这些法律体系以形成一个全面的规范框架提出想法。在数据驱动型调查中,警方通常会收集大量数据集以建立信息阵地,然后进行自动分析,以发现潜在犯罪的模式和证据。从传统的有针对性的 "以案找证 "调查转变为数据驱动的无针对性的 "以证找案 "调查,这对当前的规范框架提出了挑战。在讨论这一挑战以及本特刊六篇论文所提出的见解时,作者发现了多个问题:刑法中的人们缺乏对数据保护法的了解,因此低估了数据保护法的价值;数据主体权利在刑事诉讼背景下不能很好地发挥作用;刑法可能越来越强调工具性,而以法律保护为代价;刑法非常注重对嫌疑人的法律保护,尤其是在审判期间,而不能很好地应对从未在法庭上结束的调查,也不能很好地应对对无辜公民的保护,这些公民的数据现在也作为刑事调查的副产品被普遍处理;法律对数据收集有相对有力的规范,但对数据分析却没有。今后的发展方向是:建立一个不仅能保护嫌疑人和受害者,而且能系统地纳入无辜者权利的制度;制定一个综合的、结论性的执法数据处理规则体系,包括数据分析和数据的持续再利用;以及建立一个有能力应对数据驱动刑事诉讼这一新现实的监督体系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Regulation (EU) 2018/1805: Mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders between efficiency and safeguards. “Proceedings in criminal matters” and non-conviction based confiscation Reforming EU Criminal Law on the Facilitation of Unauthorised Entry: The new Commission proposal in the light of the Kinshasa litigation Independence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in the context of the appointment procedures The judgment of the CJEU in Inspektor (Purposes of the processing of personal data – criminal investigations) of 8 December 2022 and the concept of further processing under the Law Enforcement Directive Editorial: A trialogue on regulating data-driven criminal procedure
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1