摘要：

在刑事司法领域，我国立足于自身利益最大化原则，对侦查机关收集境外数据持主动放宽的态度；同时，为限制他国调取我国境内数据，确立数据本地化存储模式、出境安全评估机制以及刑事司法协助分段式审查模式。然而，由于数据的虚拟性与海量性，导致我国针对境内数据的单边立法难以实现预期目的。基于数据之上的多重利益结构，明确数据主权、强调数据本地化存储具有正当性，但会导致跨境数据调取无法摆脱“缓慢、低效”的困境。综合比较美国长臂管辖模式与欧盟数据分类管理制度的实施情况，在我国国内立法上，应该坚持以数据本地化存储为基础，完善数据分类、分级管理的体系。同时，为解决各国分散式立法带来的混乱局面，我国应当作为积极的规则推动者，构建跨境数据取证的国际统一方案，以实现跨境数据取证兼顾“尊重数据主权”与“快捷、高效”的目的。

关键词: 跨境, 电子数据, 取证规则, 数据主权

Abstract:

In criminal justice era，based on the principle of maximizing our own interests，China takes an active and relaxed attitude toward overseas data collection legislation.In data outflow，in order to restrict the access of domestic data from other countries，we establish the data localization storage mode，exit security evaluation mechanism and segmented review mode in judicial assistance.Based on the multi-interest structure of data，it is legitimate to clarify data sovereignty and emphasize data localization storage.However，due to the virtual and mass characters of data，it is difficult to achieve the expected purpose of protecting domestic data.Based on the multi-interest structure of data，it is legitimate to clarify data sovereignty and emphasize data localization storage.but it will lead to the difficulty of ‘slow and low efficiency' in cross-border data collection.In order to speed up the cross-border transfer of data in criminal justice，after comparing the long arm jurisdiction mode of the United States，and the data classification management system of the European Union，we should in China's domestic legislation adhere to the local data storage as the basis to improve the data classification management.At the same time，in order to achieve the goal of ‘respecting data sovereignty’ and ‘speedy and efficient’ in cross-border data collection，China should act as an active rule promoter to construct an international unified scheme for cross-border data collection.

Key words: Criminal Justice, Cross-border Data, Collection, Data Sovereignty