兒少保護法作為藝術自由之限制

Children and Youth Protection Law as a Limitation in the Freedom of Art

徐筱菁(Chiao-Ching Hsu)

《東吳法律學報》 25卷3期 (2014/01) Pp. 1-36

摘要

本文旨在探討憲法藝術自由的概念與界定，以及基於兒少人格保護對藝術自由的限制與界限。以文獻分析、實務解析與比較法方式，論述台灣與德國相關理論與實務。研究發現，藝術自由應屬憲法基本權之一，憲法對於藝術的定義以生活領域中之創作活動及其所呈現的形式為之，德國聯邦憲法法院則另運用作品範圍和作用範圍理論，擴大了藝術自由的保障範圍。基於兒少人格保護之理由，得限制藝術自由，唯該限制應遵守法治國原則下之比例原則，並在有藝術界及教育界人士成員的參與中，逐案檢討之。最後，本文對我國現行兒少保護制度提出具體建議。

關鍵字

藝術自由 ； 兒少保護 ； 德國藝術自由 ； 德國兒少保護法

並列摘要

This study aims to explore and define the concept considering the freedom of art in the constitution, and to probe the limitations and boundaries set for the freedom of art based on the protection of children and youths. The methods include literature analysis, case study, and comparative law is used to discuss the related theories and practices in Germany. The study finds that freedom of art should belong to the fundamental rights. The constitution defines art as creative activities in the domain of life as well as the forms in which art presents itself. The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany exercised the theory in scope of works and the scope of effects to expand the scope in freedom of art. For the sake of children and youth protection, the freedom of art should be limited. With the limitations pursuant to the ratio principles under the principles of a legal state, cases may need to be discussed individually with the participation of professionals from the fields of arts and education. Finally, concrete suggestions are made regarding to the current system of children and youth protection in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

freedom of art ； youth protection ； freedom of art in Germany ； The Protection of Children and Youths Act of Germany

參考文獻

史坦‧基特爾、克里斯提安‧賽蘭特、林宏濤譯(2012)。藝術想怎樣。典藏藝術家。

甘添貴(2010)。刑法各論。三民。

吳志光(2008)。司法院釋字第六一七號解釋與兒少保護─簡評最高行政院九十六年判字第二○七六號判決。全國律師。12(5)，5-12。

李建良(2003)。基本權利的理念變遷與功能體系—從耶林內克「身分理論」談起（下）。憲政時代。29(2)，175-210。

阮芳賦(2010)。性與社會文化：性學和社會中的性愛。巨流。