公共場所隱私權之保障與媒體自由_Von Hannover v. Germany案讀後摘要
壹、Von Hannover v. Germany (2004)
歐洲人權法院第三庭在Von Hannover v. Germany(2004)乙案，摩洛哥公主卡羅琳因在公眾場所遭到媒體未經許可偷拍併公佈刊登這些照片於雜誌上因而向歐洲人權法院提出申訴。
"53.
In the present case there is no doubt that the publication by various
German magazines of photos of the applicant in her daily life either on her own
or with other people falls within the scope of her private life."
"59.
Although freedom of expression also extends to the publication of
photos, this is an area in which the protection of the rights and reputation of
others takes on particular importance. The present case does not concern the
dissemination of “ideas”, but of images containing very personal or even
intimate “information” about an individual. Furthermore, photos appearing in
the tabloid press are often taken in a climate of continual harassment which
induces in the person concerned a very strong sense of intrusion into their
private life or even of persecution."
"61.
The Court notes at the outset that in the present case the photos of the
applicant in the various German magazines show her in scenes from her daily
life, thus involving activities of a purely private nature such as engaging in
sport, out walking, leaving a restaurant or on holiday. "
歐洲人權公約第8條所規定「私人生活」之保障，即非限定於特定空間或場所，而係取決於該私人活動之本質是否為公約所欲保障之範圍而定。
"76.
As the Court has stated above, it considers that the decisive factor in
balancing the protection of private life against freedom of expression should
lie in the contribution that the published photos and articles make to a debate
of general interest. It is clear in the instant case that they made no such
contribution, since the applicant exercises no official function and the photos
and articles related exclusively to details of her private life."
歐洲人權法院對如何適用權衡原則，在私人生活保障與媒體自由兩者間予以權衡，所提之判斷標準為「公益辯論原則」。媒體「攝影」或報導文章，是否具有足以促進社會大眾對於一般公共事務的辯論而定。
貳、Von Hannover v. Germany(NO.2)[GC](2012)
(Applications nos. 40660/08 and 60641/08)
歐洲人權法院大法庭於2012年之判決，提出權衡原則的五點判斷標準。
private life: at para. 85-99
freedom of expression: at para.100-107
The criteria relevant for the balancing
exercise: at para. 108
"108. Where the right to freedom of
expression is being balanced against the right to respect for private life, the
criteria laid down in the case-law that are relevant to the present case are
set out below."
(α) Contribution to a debate of general
interest
(β) How well known is the person concerned
and what is the subject of the report?
(γ) Prior conduct of the person concerned
(δ) Content, form and consequences of the
publication
(ε) Circumstances in which the photos were
taken
參、釋字第 689 號
參見釋字第689號大法官葉百修之協同意見書
判決全文參見歐洲人權法院判決資料庫（HUDOC database）
20180410
BY Wanli YANG
沒有留言:
張貼留言