论知情权和隐私权的冲突及处理原则

知情权和隐私权是公民在政治和社会生活中的两项重要的基本权利,同时也是极易产生冲突的一对权利,如何解决这种冲突?本文通过分析知情权和隐私权的概念与范围、二者冲突的表现及其根源,提出了解决知情权与隐私权冲突的四个原则:社会政治及公共利益原则、利益衡量原则、权利协调原则和人格尊严原则。     

隐私权与知情权的冲突与协调——以劳动者人身权保护为视角

隐私权与知情权均是公民所应具有的基本权利,实践中这两种权利经常会发生冲突,如何协调二者的冲突是亟待解决的问题。在劳动关系中用人单位知情权与劳动者隐私权之间也存在着冲突,主要是因为两权的属性不同、主张不同及价值取向不同造成的。所以,在协调解决知情权与隐私权的冲突中应当遵循四个基本原则,即利益衡量原则、权利协调原则、公序良俗原则和对隐私权侧重保护原则。     

隐私权与相关权利的冲突及其解决

伴随着公民权利意识觉醒而诞生的新型权利,个人隐私权得到了世界各国的认可。各国为该权利制定专门法律,将隐私权法律化予以保护。追究权利保障的原因即是权利冲突的出现。隐私权与相关权利之间的冲突有着无数的缘由,最基本缘由来自社会对于这种新兴社会资源的要求,社会要求其不损害他人利益的情况下社会共享和有序流通。由此,隐私权与相关权利产生的种种冲突也亟需解决,本文探悉广义权力冲突解决的基础上寻找隐私权这一个例的解决途径。     

隐私权的相关权利冲突

隐私权作为现代法治社会中一项新型的人格权 ,与既存的知情权和言论自由权之间有着不可避免的冲突 ,它们之间的这种矛盾实际是法律必须面对的一种价值冲突。这几种法律价值都有其合理性和不可替代的作用 ,如何选择权利机制 ,使冲突的矛盾得以调和 ,权、义双方利益得到最大实现 ,达到法律要求的“博奕”状态至关重要。本文将对这些权利冲突进行分析和整理 ,并对其如何取舍 ,尝试作一些理论上的探讨。     

权利冲突的解决原则

在中国的法治建设中,权利冲突已成为一种非常普遍和突出的法律现象,广泛地存在于司法审判、行政执法和日常生活中。权利冲突是指权利主体在行使权利的过程中与相对一方的权利相互矛盾或抵触的法律现象,解决权利冲突的原则包括权利不得滥用、基本权利优于非基本权利、利益衡量和平衡原则。     

略论隐私权与社会知情权冲突的几个问题

隐私权与社会知情权的冲突 ,既是价值观的冲突 ,更是利益的冲突。在司法实践中 ,面对两者之间的矛盾 ,笔者深入分析了两者产生冲突的真正根源和实质所在 ,认为权利体系来源于法律体系 ,但权利体系不等于法律体系 ,法律体系内存在位阶关系 ,而权利体系内并不存在谁从属谁的问题 ,当权利之间发生冲突时 ,法律应对不同的权利予以平等保护     

宪法司法化：审理部分媒体侵权诉讼的新思路

我国实现宪法司法化具有十分重要的理论和现实意义.现实中,强大的媒体侵害处于劣势的公民的隐私权和表达自由权的情况屡屡出现.由于我国普通法律中对隐私权和表达自由权的规定不完善,有必要针对媒体侵害隐私权和表达自由权的诉讼实行宪法司法化,即援引宪法相关条款,结合普通法律的规定来审理这类案件.     

我国新闻自由与人格权的冲突与选择

新闻自由和人格权是每一个民主国家的宪法都予以保障的基本权利。新闻自由虽然保障了新闻从业人员本身人格权发展的空间,却在某些情况下成为侵害人格权的渊源。新闻自由与被报导者人格权冲突的解决,不仅是私法上权利的冲突问题,同时也是宪法上基本权利冲突的问题。目前我国新闻侵权案的判决结果并未完全反映"两种权利同等重要"的基本理念,新闻媒体败诉几率较高,这里存在着法律上的缺失、新闻官司双方诉讼成本不对等等原因。根据我国的现实情况,为解决这二者的冲突,应加强新闻立法,并且在司法上对新闻自由给予优先保护。     

雇佣过程中隐私权与知情权的冲突——博弈论视角下的边界研究

雇员隐私权与雇主知情权的冲突,体现的是两个平等主体的合法权益的冲突,双方的合法权利都应受到法律的保护.运用博弈论的方法来进行研究,找到各自在单一情况下博弈的合法边界,并通过边界的确立,让二者达到一个相对的均衡状态.遵循协商原则、利益均衡原则以及增加劳动合同的附加条款,以寻求共赢的解决方案.     

新闻法治视域下媒体报道司法的权限

新闻法治是依法治国的一部分。新闻法治的基本理念包括:知情权、维护"人格权"、更正与答辩权、保密权等。媒体报道司法的权利源于公民对司法信息的知情与表达权;媒体报道司法的法律限制目前主要是要协调媒体报道司法的自由与人格权,即肖像权、名誉权和隐私权等的冲突;重提新闻专业精神是协调这种冲突的必要途径。     

Basic Rights Intervention in the Obtainment of Digital Data as Evidence in Criminal Case——An Analysis Based on Six Typical Cases

Electronic data is the most frequently used evidence in the internet and information era.Electronic data has been applied extensively and can be classified into many categories,which determine that electronic data contains all kinds off undamental rights.To clearly understand the fundamental rights contained in electronic data is an important precondition for respecting and protecting human rights in electronic data evidence obtainment.Property-type electronic data contain property rights.Traditional investigation measures such as seizure and freezing the property cannot be taken to obtain valid evidence.To directly turn the digital currency into cash and then seize the cash,will result in insufficient property rights protection,and may violate other fundamental rights of criminal suspects.The expansion of the object of the right to privacy and the change of the carrier on which the expansion depends in privacytype electronic data,determine that the obtainment of the privacytype electronic data evidence may result in intangible intervention and secondary intervention in the right to privacy.Communicationtype electronic data contains freedom of communication and the right to communication secrecy.Investigative organs can collect this kind of electronic data through search,acquisition,remote investigation and examination,and other means.However,according to the existing institution design,the above-mentioned means may result in insufficient protection of freedom of communication.Expressiontype electronic data contains freedom of expression.If investigative organs collect this kind of data,they may intervene in freedom of the press though they do not intervene in narrowly defined freedom of expression.The basic principles that should be followed in the electronic data evidence obtainment which intervenes in fundamental rights include the doctrine of legal reservation,the writ system,the principle ofp roportionality,and illegal evidence exclusion.     

论新闻报道和隐私权的冲突与平衡——以公众人物隐私权为视角

随着科技飞速发展和提高,社会的发展也日新月异,人们的权利之间也会产生冲突,新闻自由报道和隐私权的矛盾越来越多;但是,这两者并非绝对对立,它们在完善人格权方面相辅相成。遗憾的是,目前我国的立法疏漏和不全面,不能有效解决这两种权利的冲突。我国应该积极引进国外良好的制度和实践经验,从实际国情出发,平衡新闻报道和隐私权之间的冲突与矛盾。     

以国家安全为视角论新闻自由的法律规制

新闻自由是作为法人的新闻媒体所享有的对于事实真相客观公正地报道不受阻碍的权利,新闻传播对于国家安全有着巨大的影响,如果新闻自由被滥用,会对一国的国家安全产生负面影响,威胁一国的国家安全。中国现有的对于新闻自由的限制性、禁止性规定较为分散,未形成系统的法律规范,且法律效力较低。因此,应当完善我国的立法,制定效力更高、更为系统的法律规定,以维护我国的国家安全。     

论我国行政诉讼中起诉不停止执行原则

行政诉讼中具体行政行为不停止执行原则是行政诉讼法的一项特有原则.其理论基础有二:行政优先权和提高行政效率的需要.但是,在我国,这一原则与行政诉讼法的立法宗旨、主要功能以及行政强制执行制度相矛盾.本文对这些矛盾进行简要分析,在借鉴国外立法经验的基础上提出,尽管现行的起诉不停止执行原则存在诸多弊病,但不宜以起诉停止执行原则作为替代,而只应对现有的例外情形作出修改.     

“解严”后政党角力下台湾新闻自由的进步与迷思

台湾新闻自由实践在其政党角力中扮演着工具角色。换言之,新闻自由从来就不是政党角力的目的,只是权力斗争的工具。多党纷争时期,在野党高举“新闻自由”旗帜,与国民党争夺媒体资源。政党轮替后,对峙的国民两党都是表面附和“新闻自由”,实际上却采用隐性、间接的方式操控媒体。政党竞争带来了广电媒体的解禁、新闻自由法律法规的修正、新闻自由观念的成熟等正面效应。但政党对媒体的变相操控却让新闻自由异化,“只问政党,不问事实”的蓝绿媒体难以承担“第四权”责任。     

隐私权的法律保护及其价值基础

在现代社会,隐私权已经或正在成为许多国家法律明确确认和保护的权利,但我国法律迄今没有明定其为具体的权利。隐私权应否成为一项具体人格权,对它的保护有无价值,在民法典编纂之际确有探讨之必要。     

当新闻成为武器之后 --伊拉克战争与当前军事新闻传播现象的理论思考

伊拉克战争预示着战争正在告别传统进入"后现代",它以新的作战理念与游戏规则为军事新闻传播活动带来不同往昔的影响军事新闻传播是以"事实第一性"还是"利益第一性"为原则?军事新闻的正义诉求与大众媒介的娱乐化消解构成何种关系?当国家利益在力量游戏中被合法化后,新闻自由以何种形式实现?这些不能不引起人们的深入思考.     

Interpretation of the Concept of the Right to Internet Access from the Perspective of International Law

The advent of the internet era breeds a new concept, namely, the right to internet access. Many countries and international organizations, as well as individuals, are advocating or have already embodied it as a basic human right, thus enhancing the issues of whether it should be incorporated into the macro system of international human rights. By analyzing the facts, this article points out that the international concept of the right to internet access should be distinguished from its domestic concept, for there are no legal sources about the right to internet access for guidance as with some treaties in the current international law, despite its close relationship with some existing rights such as the freedom of speech, press and assembly, or the right of equality, or the right to development. And there is still a long time before the legal value and related responsibilities as well as the boundaries about the right to internet access becomes a consensus in the international society. Even though there is quite a possibility, this right hasn't been embodied as part of international human rights, and thus hasn't made a legal concept in international human right law.     

On the System of Rights Underlying the Right to Health and Constraints on the Right to Health——Including a Commentary on the Basic Healthcare and Health promotion Law(Draft)

Conceptually, health is subjective, procedural and socially reliant.This three-fold nature determines the connotations of the right to health as well as the constraints thereof.The right to health encompasses both the right to freedom and social rights.The right to freedom in the context of health means that the state should respect the health status and choices of its citizens and trust that the people are able to optimize their health through their own efforts, whereas the right to basic healthcare services is an important component of the right to health from the perspective of social rights.The review system stipulated in administrative normative documents increases, to a certain degree, the possibility that citizens can realize their right to health.The right to health is constrained in three aspects: "precondition of the possible", concurrent requirements imposed by society and conflicts among basic rights.When there is financial restraint on what the state can afford, the right to health is constrained by limits to healthcare institutions and the provision of healthcare services.over-emphasis of individual responsibility on the part of the insured can possibly transform the right to health into an obligation to be healthy .     

论基因信息隐私权的民事立法保护

国际人类基因组计划将会带来生命科学的巨大进步,但同样也会带来许多人们前所未遇的法律问题。基因信息隐私权的保护问题便是其中之一。由于基因信息自身的特点致使基因信息隐私权在内容和客体方面不同于一般的隐私权,法律应当采取特殊的手段对基因信息隐私权予以保护。文章通过对人类基因组计划与基因信息的介绍,分析了基因信息隐私权的涵义、内容等,并提出了保护基因信息隐私权的立法构想。