The title slide is titled "Communications Security and Surveillance Act and Trends in Search and Seizure Practices." It serves as the opening for a training course on "Integrity Agency New Staff Education and Training."

通訊保障法與搜索扣押實務趨勢

廉政署新進人員教育訓練課程

Source: 廉政署新進人員教育訓練課程。圖示：法錘、通訊圖示，深色背景搭配藍光線條。（封面設計）

The agenda slide, titled "簡報大綱" (Presentation Outline), lists the key sections of the presentation. These include the legal background and development, interpretation of important judgments, new challenges in technical investigations, and trends with recommendations.

簡報大綱

1. 法律背景與發展
2. 重要判決解讀
3. 技術偵查新挑戰
4. 趨勢與建議

The slide titled "刑事訴訟典範轉移" outlines key paradigm shifts in criminal procedure, including a move from physical to digital investigation spaces and an evolution from formal legality to substantive justice. It highlights core trends over a decade-long timeline, with spatial contrasts emphasizing privacy and technological challenges.

刑事訴訟典範轉移

• 從實體空間轉向數位空間調查
• 從形式合法性演進至實質正當性
• 刑事訴訟典範的核心轉移趨勢
• 時間軸顯示十年發展脈絡
• 空間對比強調隱私與技術挑戰

Source: 近十年通保法與搜索扣押實務發展

The slide discusses GPS monitoring and privacy through the Mosaic Theory, which combines aggregated GPS data to reveal comprehensive patterns of an individual's life, thereby invading reasonable expectations of informational privacy. Courts acknowledge this holistic privacy concern beyond isolated location points and require warrants for continuous surveillance to protect rights.

GPS監控與隱私

• Mosaic Theory: Aggregates GPS data into comprehensive life patterns.
• Long-term tracking invades reasonable expectation of informational privacy.
• Courts recognize holistic privacy beyond isolated location points.
• Warrants required for continuous surveillance to safeguard rights.

In the Supreme Court case 106台上3788, GPS monitoring requires a judge-issued warrant, as installing it without one violates constitutional privacy rights due to the high expectation of privacy in location data. The ruling applies the exclusionary rule to evidence from illegal GPS tracking and stresses procedural due process as essential for digital surveillance.

GPS案例判決（106台上3788）

• 最高法院要求GPS監控須經法官核發令狀
• 無令狀安裝GPS侵害憲法隱私權保障
• 判決強調位置資料具高度隱私期待
• 證據排除原則適用於非法GPS追蹤
• 程序正當性為數位監控必要要件

This slide discusses the exclusion of the plain view doctrine for searching mobile phone contents, requiring a separate warrant issued by a judge to ensure procedural fairness and digital privacy protection. It emphasizes strict adherence to the warrant requirement for mobile evidence to prevent arbitrary expansion of digital evidence collection.

手機搜索與數位證據

• 排除一目瞭然法則於手機內容搜索
• 需另案法官核發搜索令狀
• 強化數位隱私保護與程序正當性
• 手機證據需嚴格遵守令狀主義
• 避免任意擴大數位證據蒐集範圍

Digital evidence requires hash verification to ensure its integrity and prevent tampering. Separate seizures in other cases must use independent warrants to avoid abuse and scope creep, while forensic processes strengthen the chain of evidence and hash technology enhances reliability in digital forensics.

另案扣押與雜湊驗證

• 數位證據需雜湊驗證確保完整性與不可竄改
• 另案扣押須獨立令狀，避免濫權擴大搜索
• 鑑識流程強化證據鏈，維護司法公正
• 雜湊技術應用於數位取證，提升可靠性

The slide discusses the principles of wiretapping in separate cases and the one-person-one-vote rule, emphasizing that monitoring orders are strictly limited to specific targeted individuals. It highlights the application of individual judicial review to prevent expansion to unrelated parties, thereby protecting privacy rights and avoiding abuse.

另案監聽與一人一票原則

• 監聽命令僅限特定被監察人
• 一人一票原則嚴格適用
• 不得擴及另案無關人士
• 法官核發確保個別審查
• 保護隱私權避免濫用

Source: 通訊保障法與搜索扣押實務趨勢

The slide analyzes the 110 Tai Shang Zi No. 5765 ruling, which restricts the expansion of wiretapping from one case to another by requiring strong proof of high relevance between cases. It strengthens judicial oversight on wiretap extensions, establishes a standardized flowchart for relevance assessments, and protects communication privacy from abuse.

110台上大字5765裁定解析

• 限制另案擴大監聽使用範圍
• 要求案件間高度關聯性證明
• 強化法官對監聽擴張的監督
• 建立關聯性判斷流程圖標準
• 保護通訊隱私免於濫用

The slide on "裁判延伸原則整理" outlines a strict exclusion principle that prohibits the extension of evidence obtained without due legal process, particularly in telecommunications surveillance and search practices, to protect defendants' rights and uphold warrantism. It also describes limited exceptions allowing such extensions only in urgent situations or with high evidentiary relevance, subject to judicial approval to balance investigative needs with privacy safeguards while preventing abuse.

裁判延伸原則整理

The Chimel principle limits searches during arrests to the immediate area under the arrestee's control, aiming to protect officers and prevent evidence destruction. For vehicles, searches are restricted to what the driver can reach, with any broader search requiring a warrant, and courts strictly enforce these limits to safeguard constitutional rights.

附帶搜索的限縮

• Chimel原則：逮捕時搜索限於被捕人立即控制範圍。
• 目的：確保警官安全並防止證據毀滅。
• 車輛搜索：僅可及駕駛人伸手範圍內。
• 超出範圍：須另行申請搜索令狀。
• 實務限縮：嚴格適用以保障憲法權利。

Source: Slide 11

The slide analyzes case 3127 from the 112th Supreme Court bench, emphasizing adherence to the warrant principle to prevent arbitrary searches and highlighting judicial oversight for ensuring search legality. It further details how the ruling limits search scopes to protect constitutional rights while reinforcing procedural justice by excluding illegally obtained evidence.

112台上3127案例解析

• 回歸令狀原則，避免任意搜索行為
• 強調司法監督，確保搜索合法性
• 判決限制搜索範圍，保護憲法權利
• 強化程序正義，排除違法證據使用

Source: 近十年通保法與搜索扣押實務發展

Determining consent for searches goes beyond just relying on a signature, involving a comprehensive review of circumstances, including environmental pressures, police conduct, and the suspect's vulnerabilities or level of understanding. Coercion or misleading tactics invalidate consent, so true voluntariness requires the absence of any coercive elements.

同意搜索與自願性

• 綜合情狀審查，不僅依賴簽名證明
• 評估環境壓力與警察行為影響
• 考量嫌疑人弱勢與理解程度
• 脅迫或誤導即無效化同意
• 確保自願性需無脅迫因素

Source: 近十年通保法與搜索扣押實務發展

The slide, titled "同意搜索案例解析" (Consent Search Case Analysis), explains how environmental pressures can invalidate voluntary consent during searches, and how misleading statements by police can nullify apparent agreements. It includes a case illustration featuring a diagram of a coercive encounter between police and a civilian.

同意搜索案例解析

!Image

• Environmental pressure invalidates voluntary consent in searches.
• Police misleading statements nullify apparent agreement.
• Case illustration: Diagram of coercive police-civilian encounter.

Source: police consent search interaction

Digital evidence is defined as data stored or transmitted electronically. Its key characteristics include being easily modifiable with difficulty in identifying the original state, readily copied with risks of unlimited dissemination, and altered without traces, which challenges its authenticity, thus requiring strict judicial warrants for examination and preservation.

數位證據定義與特性（112台上1650）

• 數位證據定義：電子儲存或傳輸之資料形式。
• 特性一：易於修改，難以辨識原始狀態。
• 特性二：輕易複製，無限擴散風險。
• 特性三：無痕跡變更，挑戰證據真實性。
• 風險警示：需法官令狀嚴格審查與保全。

Source: 112台上1650判決

The slide, titled "趨勢分析總表," contrasts the old and new regimes in a two-column format. The old regime focuses on physical space searches with lax monitoring and GPS tracking, low privacy expectations under the plain view doctrine, and risks to procedural justice leading to evidence exclusion. In contrast, the new regime emphasizes digital space legitimacy, mandatory judicial warrants, enhanced Mosaic theory for privacy protection, hash verification for digital evidence, restrictions on cross-case use, and scrutiny of voluntariness with evidence chain preservation.

趨勢分析總表

This slide discusses challenges posed by emerging technologies to legal frameworks in surveillance and privacy. It highlights issues like Trojan horse devices evading digital warrant norms, drone monitoring requiring search principles for aerial tracking, remote surveillance needing stronger judicial oversight for real-time data collection, and the need to integrate these technologies into existing laws like the Communications Security and Surveillance Act.

新科技挑戰

• 木馬程式：隱形入侵裝置，挑戰數位令狀規範。
• 無人機監控：空中追蹤隱私，需適用搜索原則。
• 遠端監控：即時資料蒐集，強化法官監督機制。
• 法律適應：整合新科技於通保法框架。

The slide titled "Legal Practice Recommendations" outlines key advice for maintaining transparency and legality in investigations. It recommends video-recording search processes, fully preserving digital evidence chains to prevent tampering, and ensuring technical investigations are supervised by judges.

法律實務建議

• 實施搜索過程錄影以確保透明度與正當性
• 完整保全數位證據鏈避免篡改風險
• 技術偵查須配合法官監督強化合法性

Source: 重點：搜索錄影、保全證據鏈、技術配合法官監督。圖示：核心三點+盾牌圖案。

The slide's title, "課程總結," marks the conclusion of the course. It emphasizes progressing from "discovering the truth" to "procedural justice," with a subtitle highlighting the application of learned principles while strictly adhering to warrant requirements and privacy rights.

課程總結

從「發現真實」邁向「程序正義」

應用所學，嚴守令狀原則與隱私權

Source: 近十年通保法與搜索扣押實務發展

The slide, titled "Call to Action," urges the practical application of learned knowledge while strictly adhering to legal principles. Its subtitle emphasizes integrating these lessons into real-world practice, upholding the spirit of rule of law, and ensuring procedural justice.

Call to Action

務實運用學習，謹守法治原則。

將所學應用於實務，堅守法治精神，確保程序正義。