智能行政执法中运用无人机调查取证的风险及应对——以违章建筑调查取证为例

Risks and Countermeasures of Using UAVs for Investigation and Evidence Collection in Intelligent Administrative Law Enforcement—A Case Study of Investigative Evidence Collection for Unlawful Constructions

摘要: 无人机调查取证，作为一种新型的智能化行政调查方式，在面对违法排污、违建抢建等“即时性违法”难以取证的情况下展现出显著的应对能力，破除了传统调查模式下受限于地理环境复杂性与人力资源短缺等关键性制约因素，显著提升了行政执法效能。尽管运用无人机调查取证具备高效、便捷等优势，但是伴随数字技术深度嵌入政府治理流程，技术赋能与治理目标的耦合效应已突破原有公权与私权的制度平衡框架。运用无人机调查取证不仅具有非现场执法所面临的共性问题，同时因其自身的特殊性，肇致面临更多复杂问题，这些问题涉及法律合规性、证据效力争议、权益冲突及实操障碍等多个维度。在此技术治理范式转型过程中，亟需回应运用无人机调查取证的必要性以及构建符合时代要求的复合型规制体系，以实现技术工具理性与行政法治理性的动态平衡。

Abstract: As a new type of intelligent administrative investigation method, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for investigative evidence collection has demonstrated remarkable capabilities in addressing the challenges of obtaining evidence for “immediate violations” such as illegal sewage discharge and unauthorized construction. It breaks through the key constraints of traditional investigation models, including the complexity of the geographical environment and shortages of human resources, significantly enhancing the effectiveness of administrative law enforcement. Although the use of UAVs for investigative evidence collection offers advantages such as high efficiency and convenience, with the deep integration of digital technologies into government governance processes, the coupling effect of technological empowerment and governance objectives has disrupted the original institutional balance framework between public and private rights. Using UAVs for investigative evidence collection not only encounters common issues faced by off-site law enforcement but also, due to its unique characteristics, gives rise to more complex problems. These problems span multiple dimensions, including legal compliance, disputes over the admissibility of evidence, conflicts of rights and interests, and practical operational obstacles. During this transformation of the technological governance paradigm, there is an urgent need to address the necessity of using UAVs for investigative evidence collection and to establish a composite regulatory system that meets the requirements of the times, in order to achieve a dynamic balance between the instrumental rationality of technological tools and the governance rationality of administrative law.