透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.15.6.77
  • 期刊

隱私之合理期待標準於我國司法實務的操作-我的期待?你的合理?誰的隱私?

The Application of the Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Test in Taiwan- My Expectation? Reasonable in Your View? Whose Privacy?

摘要


我國法院就合理隱私期待標準的操作,形式上雖使用司法院釋字第689號解釋引介美國法院之兩步驟式之主、客觀期待標準,但在操作效果上其實只有客觀標準發揮作用,使得隱私保護與否,取決於社會的合理隱私期待,而非隱私主體自我的隱私期待。那麼合理隱私期待標準保護的到底是「誰」的隱私?即生困擾。本文主張,隱私權所保護的不僅是個人對所處社會體的「自我」回應態度,其最終所保護的應是包覆「自我」的「社會有機體」對於該自我的回應態度。自我的隱私期待,必須是社會所接受的合理期待,而非純粹的「自我」隱私保護。客觀期待標準的存在,即來自於隱私的「社會性」特徵之作用所致。

並列摘要


When it comes to privacy protection analysis, the Taiwanese courts often apply the subjective-objective, two-tier theory which was adopted by the U.S. court and referenced to in Interpretation No. 689 issued by Justices of the Constitutional Court, Judicial Yuan. Nevertheless, our observation indicates that applying the two-tier theory often results in the protection of a socially recognized privacy rather than a privacy standard that an individual has sought. At a first glance, it seems to be unreasonable that the privacy doctrine cannot fully protect an individual's privacy. However, one's privacy might also conflict with other persons' rights in the society. It is therefore worthy to discuss whose right shall be protected under the doctrine of the reasonable expectation of privacy. This article argues that, not only an individual's privacy expectation shall be considered when applying the privacy doctrine, but the privacy expectation of the society where a person lives and interacts with others shall also be taken into consideration in order to draw a line for better privacy protection.

參考文獻


葉俊榮(2016),〈探尋隱私權的空間意涵—大法官對基本權利的脈絡論證〉,《中研院法學期刊》,18 期,1-40 頁
林鈺雄(2013),《刑事訴訟法(上)》,7 版。臺北:自版。
林子儀(2015),〈公共隱私權〉,國立臺灣大學法律學院、財團法人馬氏思上文教基金會編,《第五屆馬漢寶講座論文彙編》,頁7-62。臺北:馬氏思上文教基金會。
林鈺雄(2008),〈論通訊之監察—評析歐洲人權法院相關裁判之發展與影響〉,《東吳法律學報》,19卷4 期,頁109-152。
陳慈陽(2005),《憲法學》,2 版。臺北:元照。

延伸閱讀