A Study On The Constitution Guarantee Of Chinese Citizens’ Freedom Of Communication

As a social animal,human beings are inevitably inseparable from the communication activities of transmitting information,expressing ideas and exchanging feelings.Therefore,communication activities play an important role in human development and social progress.With the upgrading of technology,the connotation of the right to freedom of communication should keep pace with the times,and the protection of this right should not be limited by the times.There are provisions related to the right to freedom of communication in the current laws and local regulations,and whether these provisions will infringe the freedom and privacy of communication stipulated in the constitution has been discussed in the academic circles,but there is still no unified answer on the analysis process and results.To analyze whether the provisions on the right to freedom of communication in the local laws and regulations of Gansu and Inner Mongolia,Article 47 of the prison law and Article 70 of the civil procedure law contradict the constitution,it is necessary to use the "scope of protection-demonstration of the constitutionality of restriction-restriction" of basic rights restriction as the review framework.First,it is necessary to clarify the definition of the right to freedom of communication,Analyze the constitutional right attribute of the right to freedom of communication,clarify the connotation of freedom of communication and communication secret,and bring the call record into the protection scope of the right to freedom of communication.The second step is to analyze the traffic management department’s access to the call records of the parties to the traffic accident,the prison’s inspection of criminal letters and the court’s access to the call records in turn.These three acts belong to the restriction of the right to freedom of communication.Finally,to demonstrate the constitutionality of these three restrictions,we must meet the requirements of formal constitutionality and substantive constitutionality,and then come to the conclusion that the call record belongs to "non content communication information",but the "traffic police checking mobile phone" is based on the provisions of local regulations,not the restrictions made by law,which is unconstitutional because it violates the principle of legal reservation;In "court access to call records",call records belong to the protection of communication secrets and "non content communication information".The right of court access to evidence is stipulated in the civil procedure law.The investigation act is in accordance with the law and the law itself is constitutional,which is constitutional in form and substance;The provisions of Article 47 of the prison law are all aimed at the content of communication.The restriction can only be communication inspection,which should comply with the main elements,reason elements and procedural elements stipulated in the constitution.It is unconstitutional because it violates the principle of aggravating legal reservation.