| 摘要: |
| 我国政务数据共享长期面临政务部门不愿、不会、不便、不敢共享之困境。作为应急工具，健康码借由政治压力，依托工作专班和大数据管理机构，利用互联网企业力量，通过授权决定，一定程度上实现了突破。但这种突破仍有局限，因为在后疫情时代，政治压力难以持续，专责机构面临挑战，政企合作有待转型，授权规范仍需细化。要真正实现政务数据共享，有赖于来自政务部门内部和外部社会公众的压力和促动。而要降低政务部门共享数据的法律风险，降低民众对政务数据共享的担忧，就需明确共享的法治边界。现有制度和实践存在三大问题： 原则上，笼统要求“以共享为原则，不共享为例外”与个人信息保护法制的基本逻辑相抵触；规则上，无条件共享、有条件共享和不予共享的数据分类不准确，以数据定共享的做法不合理，共享方式分类不适当；程序上，共享行为公开和告知的法定要求未落实。这些问题需以原则修正、规则重塑和程序完善的方式来解决。 |
| 关键词: 政务数据共享 健康码 以共享为原则，不共享为例外 个人信息保护 |
| DOI： |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:国家社会科学基金重大项目“社会信用体系的法律保障机制研究”（项目编号： 21&ZD199） |
|
| The Promotion and Boundary of Data Sharing in the Public Sector |
|
Peng Chun
|
|
|
| Abstract: |
| For a long time, public data sharing has been facing the plight that government departments are unwilling, unable, incapable and afraid to share data with each other. As an emergency response tool, the health code, by virtue of political pressure, relying on special working units and large data management institutions, using the power of Internet enterprises, and on the basis of authorization rules, has broken through that plight to some extent. However, this breakthrough is still limited. In the post epidemic era, political pressure is difficult to sustain, specialized agencies face challenges, government-enterprise cooperation needs to be transformed, and authorization rules need to be refined. To further promote the sharing of government data, internal and external pressure from the government itself and the public is needed. In order to reduce the legal risk of data sharing by government departments and the public's concerns about data sharing, it is necessary to clarify the legal boundaries of sharing. There are three main problems in the existing system and practice: In terms of principle, it generally requires that “sharing is the principle, non-sharing is the exception”, which contravenes the basic logic of the Personal Information Protection Law; in terms of rules, the classification of unconditional sharing, conditional sharing and non sharing is inaccurate, the practice of sharing based on data is unreasonable, and the classification of sharing mode is inappropriate; and in terms of procedure, the statutory requirements for disclosure and notification of sharing activities have not been implemented. These problems need to be solved by revising principles, reshaping rules and improving procedures. |
| Key words: Government Data Sharing, Health Code, Sharing as a Principle, Non-sharing as an Exception, Personal Information Protection |
