透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.14.253.221
  • 期刊

什麼是仇恨言論,應否及如何管制:歐洲人權法院相關判決分析

What is Hate Speech? Shall and How to Regulate?-Analysis of Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

摘要


本文透過分析歐洲人權法院判決,關注何謂仇恨言論及應否與如何限制等議題,同時從政治爭議、宗教衝突、種族爭論、國家認同、性別認同等五個面向論述之。歐洲人權法院沒有明確指出仇恨言論之定義,同時歐洲人權法院在納粹、法西斯、攻擊尤太人、提倡極端宗教思考及排除特定宗教人士之言論等領域適用公約第17條。本文認為,其實歐洲人權法院不需要先劃定「禁區」,也不必要強調適用公約第17條排除權利保障,而可以透過公約第10條第2項及第11條第2項之審查,決定締約國限制表意自由及集會結社自由是否違反比例原則。

並列摘要


This article reviews issues including what constitutes hate speech and whether and how to regulate it through an analysis of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. The relevant cases are divided into five fields: political controversy, religious conflict, racial dispute, national identity and gender character. The Court does not explicitly define hate speech, but regards Nazi, Fascist, anti-Jewish, extreme expression, exclusion of Muslims or members of a specific race, race-based threats, and appeals to violence as forms of hate speech. Some of these expressions are excluded from protection because of Article 17 of the Convention. The Court also rules that a political party based on Sharia law can be dissolved; preventive measure can be imposed due to an association with true threats; speech appealing to violence can be prohibited. This essay argues that the Court need not draw a "restricted zone", nor emphasis the application of Article 17 of the Convention. It may, instead, focus on second paragraphs of Articles 10 and 11 to review whether the restrictions comply with the principle of proportionality. The essay also argues that the Court has to clarify why Sharia law does not stand with democratic principles. The Court should insist on its own relevant and sufficient pressing social need principle.

參考文獻


陳宜中(2006)。當穆罕默德遇上言論自由。思想。2,35-51。
陳宜中(2007)。仇恨言論不該受到管制嗎?反思德沃金的反管制論證。政治與哲學評論。23,47-87。
廖福特(2003)。歐洲人權法。臺北=Taipei:學林=Sharing。
謝世民(2009)。歧視仇視的言論也享有自由嗎?。思想。12,247-253。
Bader, V.(2014).Free speech or non-discrimination as trump? Reflections on contextualised reasonable balancing and its limits.Journal of Ethic and Migration Studies.40(2),320-338.

被引用紀錄


蕭孝如(2017)。警察強制護送就醫制度之研究-以精神衛生法第32條為中心〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201703770

延伸閱讀