徵信社 評價So-called “jiangnan first detection” private detective han bing to “xin min weekly” exclusive since explode black curtain: alleged “holmes” it is information broker however. He said that if public security, health, education, housing management, car management and other public departments, Banks, communications, aviation, insurance and other commercial service organizations do not have “ghost”, private investigators, no matter how powerful, to obtain relevant core information of citizens “almost impossible”. Although the author of this industry is completely ignorant of the inside information, but han bing institute “disclosure” of information again confirmed a everyone’s guess, that is, the relevant departments and units did not do their duty and obligation to protect citizens’ personal information. I personally believe that the legality of private detective work should not be our focus. In fact, on the one hand, even if there is no private detective, as long as there ar徵信社找人e loopholes in the system, our personal privacy and private information will still flow into the society in different ways. On the other hand, many countries have legitimate private investigators, but the level of disclosure of private information is much lower than ours. So, have illicit detective, whether allow illicit detective to legalize, how to standardize illicit detective activity limits, to the protection of individual privacy, not crucial problem. The real question is: first, should personal information be protected by law? Second, how should personal information protected by law be protected? It is no longer a problem that personal information should be protected by law. In China, including my address, telephone number, family situation, income status, physical condition and other personal information belongs to the scope of personal privacy, whether to disclose relevant personal information, unless required by law, all belong to the scope of independent decisiwww.cdrom007.com/on. In case of illegal disclosure of personal information, individuals have the right to be protected according to law. Thus, the key to the problem is how to protect personal information according to law. In our country, a huge amount of personal information is flowing into society in incredible ways. Technology experts have revealed that it is now possible to monitor everything you say and do without a person’s knowledge or any physical contact with you. The continuous progress of technology, of course, has improved the ability to fight against crime, but it has also made the legitimate rights and interests of ordinary people face an increasingly serious threat. The legal protection of individual privacy cannot be entirely dependent on state organs. As a right, the right of privacy fundamentally depends on the sound mechanism of the right holder to protect his own right. Just think, if our privacy is leaked, we have the right to ask the police to carry out investigation台灣徵信社-什麼是徵信社 activities, we can Sue the infringers in the court, and we can get relevant compensation, even huge compensation, so that the society can have countless more policemen without paying more costs. The purpose of giving people rights is to arm them and let them defend their rights. Therefore, the establishment of a state under the rule of law is not to strengthen the power of the state, but to mobilize the masses to help themselves in accordance with the law within the framework of the system. Han bing’s disclosure once again proves a simple truth to the public: in the absence of legal constraints, it is possible for anyone not to take the rights of others seriously (otherwise, it is impossible for private information to be disclosed), including state organs and state-owned enterprises. It can be inferred that the realization of rights cannot depend on others. The essence of law is the protection of rights, and the right holder is the first person responsible for the protec徵信社私人調查找人尋人tion of rights.