誠如週知，2014 年1 月14 日立法院火速通過「通訊保障及監察法」 修正案，新增了「調取票」此一令狀，希望藉此防止調取通訊紀錄之 情形過於氾濫。然而，此舉不僅立即引起檢警機關反彈，從立法過程 來看，更有流於報復性立法之嫌。 基於兼顧「保障」與「監察」之前提下，本文認為，本次修法之 結果，對現行實務作法雖無重大影響，但通訊紀錄與通訊內容之監察， 兩者性質不同、規範密度有別，尤其調取通訊紀錄之偵查作為，反而 與一般對物之搜索扣押類似，建議回歸刑事訴訟法上搜索扣押之規 範，並與個人資料保護法、電信法為整體性之思考，始為上策。

The amendments of the Communication Security and Surveillance Act is made on January 14th, 2014. The addition of “access warrant” intends to prevent the excessive acquisition of communication records in criminal procedure. However, the change is against by prosecutors and the police and also viewed as “a legislation for revenge.” Under the principle of considering the security and surveillance, this study proposes that two different natures of the surveillance of communication records and information results in different regulated intensity. Also, the amendment is not influential to justice practice. Therefore, the acquisition of communication records alike general seize and search should be primarily regulated by the Criminal Procedure Law. Meanwhile, related articles of information protection in the Personal Information Protection Act and the Telecommunication Act should be amended as soon as possible.