兽性总裁的爱奴,好看的言情小说,风凌天下

比例原則視域下個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)跨境流動(dòng)規(guī)制中的利益權(quán)衡

網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全與數(shù)據(jù)治理 1期

張瀠之

(中央財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué) 法學(xué)院，北京100081)

摘要： 目前，全球性的個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)跨境流動(dòng)規(guī)制尚未形成，雖然區(qū)域全面經(jīng)濟(jì)伙伴關(guān)系協(xié)定(RCEP)已對(duì)以美歐為主導(dǎo)的兩大格局之價(jià)值“漏洞”予以填補(bǔ)，將國(guó)家安全上升為可與個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利、經(jīng)濟(jì)利益相提并論的第三大利益，但隱私盾協(xié)議的失效卻也意味著“嚴(yán)格型”與“寬松型”規(guī)制之間仍存在激烈矛盾，而這源于不同國(guó)家對(duì)這三大利益的不同考量。但這一沖突并非不可彌合。比例原則這一科學(xué)方法論的指引，有助于盡可能平衡三大利益，探尋出全球規(guī)制之理想路徑——“平衡點(diǎn)”，扭轉(zhuǎn)“分而治之”的局面。雖然受制于推進(jìn)構(gòu)建全球性規(guī)制之困難，目前我國(guó)域內(nèi)立法仍然偏向于“數(shù)據(jù)本地化”立場(chǎng)，但我國(guó)仍應(yīng)當(dāng)以“平衡點(diǎn)”為奮斗目標(biāo)，完善國(guó)內(nèi)立法框架的同時(shí)，期待多元共治之美好愿景的實(shí)現(xiàn)。

關(guān)鍵詞： 個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)跨境流動(dòng) 比例原則成本收益分析數(shù)據(jù)本地化 RCEP

中圖分類號(hào)： D92
文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼： A
DOI： 10.19358/j.issn.2097-1788.2023.01.005
引用格式：張瀠之. 比例原則視域下個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)跨境流動(dòng)規(guī)制中的利益權(quán)衡[J].網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全與數(shù)據(jù)治理，2023，42(1)：37-44，53.

Trade-offs in the regulation of cross-border flows of personal data from the perspective of proportionality principle

Zhang Yingzhi

(School of Law，Central University of Finance and Economics，Beijing 100081，China)

Abstract： Although the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership(RCEP) has filled the “l(fā)oophole” of values between the two major patterns dominated by the United States and Europe, the global regulation of cross-border flows of personal data has not yet been established. It marks the awakening of developing countries when the interest of national security was elevated to the equal weight with personal data rights and economic interest. However, the failure of Privacy Shield indicates that there is still an intense contradiction between “strict”and “relaxed” regulations, which stems from different considerations of aforementioned three interests by different countries. However, this contradiction is not irreparable. The principle of proportionality was renewed by cost-benefit analysis with a formulaic method, under the guidance of which it is possible to balance these three interests and explore the ideal path of global regulation, namely “balance point”, to reverse the divided situation in global regulation. Although the domestic legislation in China preferred the position of “data localization” due to the difficulty of constructing global regulations, China should improve the domestic legislative framework under the goal of“balance point”, and meanwhile await bright future of pluralistic co-governance.

Key words : cross-border flows of personal data；proportionality principle；cost-benefit analysis；data localization；Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership

0 引言

2021年7月，國(guó)務(wù)院互聯(lián)網(wǎng)信息辦公室(下稱“網(wǎng)信辦”)對(duì)“滴滴出行”啟動(dòng)網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全審查。兩日后，“滴滴出行”因嚴(yán)重違法收集使用個(gè)人信息，被下架并責(zé)令整改[1]。隨后，網(wǎng)信辦加大審查力度，對(duì)“運(yùn)滿滿”“貨車幫”等分別啟動(dòng)網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全審查。究其原因在于，其赴美上市行為造成大量國(guó)內(nèi)個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)流向美國(guó)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)隱患。“滴滴出行”等企業(yè)在建構(gòu)其智能化系統(tǒng)的過程中引發(fā)了一系列數(shù)據(jù)倫理問題與數(shù)據(jù)安全風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，而海外上市將其推向高潮，轉(zhuǎn)化為關(guān)乎國(guó)家安全的利益形態(tài)[2]。相較于國(guó)內(nèi)流動(dòng)，跨境流動(dòng)不僅會(huì)導(dǎo)致本國(guó)無法直接監(jiān)管數(shù)據(jù)處理者，增加個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利被侵犯的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，還會(huì)威脅國(guó)家數(shù)據(jù)主權(quán)、危害國(guó)家安全，因此，很多國(guó)家采取“嚴(yán)格型”規(guī)制。

盡管如此，個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)跨境勢(shì)不可擋。相較于新冠疫情造成的傳統(tǒng)商品及資本流動(dòng)受阻，數(shù)據(jù)全球化仍勢(shì)如破竹。我國(guó)數(shù)字經(jīng)濟(jì)增速已達(dá)GDP增速3倍以上，其規(guī)模占比也呈現(xiàn)增長(zhǎng)態(tài)勢(shì)。在2021年G20數(shù)字經(jīng)濟(jì)部長(zhǎng)會(huì)議及聯(lián)合國(guó)貿(mào)發(fā)會(huì)議中，數(shù)據(jù)跨境流動(dòng)便是重點(diǎn)議題。各國(guó)強(qiáng)烈呼吁加強(qiáng)數(shù)據(jù)互聯(lián)互通，我國(guó)在大會(huì)中也肯定了數(shù)據(jù)跨境流動(dòng)對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的助推作用，期望以安全和發(fā)展并重為原則，在安全可信的基礎(chǔ)上促進(jìn)合作共贏[3]。

眾所周知，數(shù)據(jù)具有非競(jìng)爭(zhēng)性，這意味著對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)的開放與共享非但不會(huì)損害其自身價(jià)值，反而因?yàn)槎喾街黧w的重復(fù)利用與深入挖掘而獲得更大的社會(huì)價(jià)值[4]。但數(shù)據(jù)大規(guī)模流動(dòng)帶來巨大經(jīng)濟(jì)紅利的同時(shí)，也會(huì)引發(fā)眾多安全風(fēng)險(xiǎn)與監(jiān)管挑戰(zhàn)[5]。針對(duì)個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)跨境流動(dòng)問題，不同的國(guó)家基于不同的價(jià)值取向，在權(quán)衡個(gè)人數(shù)據(jù)權(quán)利、國(guó)家安全與經(jīng)濟(jì)利益的基礎(chǔ)上，形成了不同的治理模式，并擁有截然不同的立場(chǎng)——限制或鼓勵(lì)自由流動(dòng)。如何尋求最為科學(xué)的規(guī)制路徑，最大程度促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)利益發(fā)展，是當(dāng)今數(shù)據(jù)治理面臨的重要問題。

本文詳細(xì)內(nèi)容請(qǐng)下載：http://www.viuna.cn/resource/share/2000005096.

作者信息：

張瀠之

(中央財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué) 法學(xué)院，北京100081)

歡迎關(guān)注電子技術(shù)應(yīng)用2023年2月22日==>>商業(yè)航天研討會(huì)<<

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

相關(guān)內(nèi)容