경찰활동의 수사와 정보 분리에관한 법제의 비교 검토

Every country in the world has its own information ageny, but they are all different in terms of organizational structure, size, tasks and activities. This is because each country has different national political situation, external relations, security situation and historical experience. As noted above, in developed countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, domestic intelligence agencies are functioning as police officers. But the FBI in the United States and the SS(MI-5) in the UK are independent from police organizations. Furthermore, even if police conduct information activities based on 'autonomous police system', it has a legal system in which monopoly structure can not be formed. In particular case of Germany, prevention of oversizing intelligence agencies is considered importantt due to past historical experience. Thus, dispersion of functions and powers of intelligence agencies is in practice. The separation of information and investigation, and the dispersion of functions and powers of intelligence agencies were no exception to the United States. Then, after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the lack of cooperation between intelligence agencies led to the perception that the failure to use and applicate the holding information were the cause of the incident. In other words, the fact that various intelligence agencies did not share or connect the pieces of information that they had is a decisive reason for not preventing 9/11 in advance. This analysis systematically reorganized the structure of various information organizations scattered around each sector. Some have argued that the United States is pursuing an integrated, non-separate intelligence agency to bolster information sharing and cooperation between intelligence agencies, but this is not true. In accordance with the principle of separation of power, advanced countries are adopting a separated organizational system in order to prevent the formation of a power organization. In addition, they set ‘separation between information and investigation’ as the basic principle in order to prevent specific institution from having too much information power and investigation authority. On the other hand, the currently discussed police reform measures as the reform of power authority can not be simply compared to the FBI information and investigation activities in the United States. First, the reorganization of information agencies in the United States and the change of information utilization do not mean 'reinforcement of police unilateral information activity' and 'police investigation and information monopoly'. In accordance with the Information Reform Act of 2005, the Office of National Intelligence (ODNI) has been newly established, making it impossible for a head of a specific institution to have unified control of information and investigation. It is true that the FBI has been performing a powerful intelligence function since September 11, but the information activities of various intelligence agencies, including the FBI, are attached to a separate control system that is centered on the DNI, an independent cabinet-level organization. In short, there is a fundamental difference from our system, in which the information police are attached to a single hierarchy of order with the police chief as a peak. Next, after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the transformation of the US information community and the reform of intelligence agencies did not merely reinforce the information rights of investigative agencies such as the FBI. Rather it changed the structure of the 'functional center'. In other words, in the case of major advanced countries such as the United States, institutional devices are provided to prevent the concentration of power of intelligence agencies. These devices include the maintenance of detached information agencies and the control and supervision systems of the administrative units and the councils Information in modern intelligence information society is a source of strength and a powerful instrument of power. The discussion on information activity of police department and national intelligence agencies is necessary for the consensus of the people. Also, it must be strictly obeyed under the principle of 'power is divided and always monitored' It must be observed.