Digital Age，Traditional crimes generally touch the Internet，Criminal activities spread globally through network space。But a country's criminal judicial organs in the process of prosecution，It is often limited by the jurisdiction of strong regional attributes under the framework of the sovereign framework; and the international criminal judicial assistance mechanism used by traditions for cross -border crime investigation，Due to its complex procedures、The process is lengthy、Strict conditions、Congenital defects such as external factors，Unable to adapt to network space to quickly collect evidence、The actual needs of effective investigation of crimes。In this background，International cooperation that needs to be strengthened to strengthen network space crime governance、Innovative international norm consensus、Reconstruction related international rules。April 2023，Supreme People's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as "Supreme Prosecution") released the "Opinions on Strengthening the Law of the Law of the Law of the New Era"，Among them, "Actively participate in international governance of network space"，and propose the "Actively Participated in the Convention on the United Nations Conditional Criminal Crime" (hereinafter referred to as the "Convention")，Put forward and explain the concept and practice of the rule of law to promote the rule of law in my country "。

bet365 Play online games  

On the one hand，Currently attaches great importance to relevant legislative work in various countries and regions，and achieved certain practical results。2001 by the European Union to formulate，United States、Canada、Budapest, which is drafted by countries such as Japan and other countries, "The Convention on Network Crime"，is the first international convention specifically for cyber bet365 live casino games crimes。The definition of cyber crime、Data Classification、Cross -border data collection mechanism between member states，All have a profound impact on the rules of the governance of the international or regional network space crimes later。For example，The Commonwealth State on the basis of the "Internet Crime Convention"，Drafted in 2002 "Demonstration Law of Computer and Computer Crime"，In 2018，Emphasize the establishment of a stable international combating network crime cooperation mechanism; the African Union passed the "Cyber ​​Security and Personal Data Protection Convention" in 2014;、Pacific island nations and Africa are drafted "Cyber ​​Crime/Electronic Crime: Demonstration Policies Guide and Legislative Text", "Pacific Island Countries Inter -Crime Regional Demonstration Law", "Computer Crime and Network Crime: Southern Africa Development Community Demonstration Law" and so on.。

On the other hand，The current legislative practice is also insufficient。Institutional exploration of international governance cooperation in the early cyber space crime，Most of them pay attention to the establishment of the criminal entity law，Especially promoting the definition of member states in the definition of cyber crime and covering the scope，But the innovation in international criminal judicial procedures is relatively limited。According to the "Global Condition of Network Crime Legislative Legislature (2013-2023)" report released by the European Commission's Cyber ​​Crime Project Office，From 2013 to 2023，Countries that have legislation from criminal law on the level of criminal law have increased from 131 to 178，and the country that has been legislated in the same period has increased from 50 to 96。This situation does not mean that there are fewer programmatic disorders in international governance of cybercrime，On the contrary，From the perspective of the practice of cyber space crime governance in recent years，Criminal justice challenges are more complicated and intense。

Judicial Challenges of Cyber ​​Space Crime Governance 

The first is the problem of network space jurisdiction。There is a contrast between the strong regional restrictions of the strong region of law enforcement under the framework of the sovereign framework，Investigation agencies in a country are often difficult to collect electronic evidence involved in the case stored overseas。my country's 2016 "two highs and one" formulated "Regulations on handling criminal case collection, extracting, review and judge several issues of electronic data，once authorized the investigation organs to extract online data stored by overseas storage; however, in 2019, the "Rules for Electronic Data Collection of Criminal Cases for Criminal Cases of Public Security Organs" formulated by the Ministry of Public Security，The extraction scope of the extraction of overseas data is limited to the "public release"。The reason for this range is limited，The conflict between cross -border data collection and traditional judicial jurisdiction。

The second is the issue of data rights protection。During the treatment of crime of network space，Whether it is the prediction and prevention of crime risk in advance，The diffusion of the hazards of crime in the matter，Still the prosecution of criminal cases afterwards，cannot be separated from the use and regulation of data。At the same time，The rights and interests carried by the data are becoming increasingly complicated，Has become data sovereignty、Data security、Personal information protection and other multiple institutional values ​​at the aggregation point。In the process of carrying out cyber space crimes in a country，Especially when it involves cross -border data collection，Data rights guarantee systems between different countries or regions often have differences and conflicts，substantially hindered the international synergy of cyber space crime governance。

The third is the issue of public and private cooperation。Compared with criminal judicial power such as public prosecution law，Network service providers Bet365 app download and other private subjects have obvious advantages in terms of data control or technical capabilities; and，Provide data involved in the case through the network service provider，To a certain extent, it can weaken the direct conflict of the sovereignty of China ’s family sovereignty。So，Internet service providers are increasingly participating in the activities of network space crime governance，Multi -level、Multi -dimensional、In -depth cooperative relationships in many fields。But the network service provider is not a criminal judiciary，Critical crime is not its core business。Can different countries or regions be voluntarily assisted in criminal judicial activities for domestic network service providers、Assist in what scope、How to assist the requirements is different，Coupled with the system differences in digital rule of law in various countries，Network service providers may violate their national laws and regulations when assisting the criminal judicial organs of other countries，Therefore, there is a dilemma of public and private cooperation。

The fourth is the problem of digital ability and system gap。Differences between the degree of criminal judicial system and digitalization of various countries，Make the investigating agency's cross -border evidence collection ability and the anti -investigation capacity of criminals，There is a gap between governance needs and system supply in different countries or regions，and objectively lead to the formation of the international criminal shelter of the network space。

Procedure method of network space crime governance 

The first is the "Convention" drafted by the United Nations。2019，The United Nations has passed the resolution No. 74/247，Decided to form a special committee to formulate an international convention of cyber crime，It is planned to complete the drafting work in 2024，It is expected to become the first regulatory document for network space governance that is actively promoted by China formed by China。Current，Special Committee has held five bet365 Play online games meetings，Established the basic framework of the Convention，Procedure measures and international cooperation of cross -border law enforcement is its key content。The Convention Although it is mainly aimed at the typical network crime，But it can be seen from the name of the Convention，The procedural measures for cross -border evidence obtained by its establishment are not limited to the new type of crime，It is also applicable to other touch net crimes。

The second is the "Second Additional Protocol" under the framework of the "Internet Crime Convention"。"Second Additional Protocol" drafted after more than four years，officially passed in 2021，Its legislative purpose is to help law enforcement agencies in member states in time、Effectively collect electronic evidence stored overseas，Therefore, this protocol has introduced direct cooperation with network service providers、Quickly obtain the cross -border convenience obtaining mechanism such as information and traffic data such as registered registered persons。According to the Guidelines issued by the "Internet Crime Convention" committee in June 2023，Related procedural measures are not only suitable for the classic meaning of the "Internet Crime" in the Classic Significance of the Criminal Crime，It is also suitable for any other traditional crime that involves cross -border collection and extract electronic evidence。

Third, the EU is currently being drafted in the "Electronic Evidence Electronic Evidence Order and Preservation Order of Criminal Cases" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations")。The drafting of the Regulations began in 2015，Drafting the Commission in 2018 released the "Regulations (Draft)"，Since then, I have experienced long consultation and revision process。June 2023，The European Parliament and the EU Council reached an agreement on the Regulations (Draft)，"Regulations" away from the formal pass from only one step away。After passing，The Regulations will establish a system of EU's retrieval order and EU security order，bet365 live casino games It aims to authorize member states to issue assistance to the network service provider of another member country、Instructions involved in electronic evidence in the preservation case。

Except for the exploration of the representative system at the above international or regional levels，Cross -border law enforcement issues in network space crime governance，There is also a regulatory mode of "domestic law+bilateral agreement" based on American law as an example。In recent years，The United States relies on its network information technology and industrial advantages，Based on its domestic law "Clarifying the Legal Use of Overseas Data" (also known as "Cloud Law")，Establish bilateral protocols with other countries，Gradually build a standard system for cross -border cracking on cyber crimes，Have a certain international influence and demonstration。This mode also reflects the overflow effect of domestic law validity in the digital era through the overflow effect generated by the network space。

The above procedures, although there are different paths，But the focus is relatively consistent，All try to reconcile the differences in criminal judicial rules in different countries or regions，Improve traditional international criminal judicial assistance mechanism; and through institutional innovation and capacity building，Active response to procedural obstacles to cross -border cross -border cross -border cross -border crimes。Current，Internationally, competition on the standards of cyber crime governance is becoming increasingly fierce，The construction of this specification is related to the digital transformation of the criminal judicial system of a country，It is also closely related to the construction of the country's digital rule of law system。The moment of reconstruction of the rules of crime governance，China actively promote the country as the Convention，On the one hand, it is necessary to actively coordinate the relationship between criminal justice and digital rule of law，To adapt to the practical needs of compounding of crimes bet365 Play online games in cyber space; on the other hand, it is necessary to properly promote the connection between domestic law and international rules，Especially paying attention to the connection and collaboration of programming rules，To enhance the overall efficiency of cross -border cracking crimes in the network space。

(The author is a professor at the School of Law of Beijing Aeronautics and Astronautics University)