Constitutional limitations of the privacy framework advanced in Eisenstadt v. Baird and Roe v. Wade

This paper examines the role of framing in advancing a progressive sexual and reproductive rights agenda. U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Griswold v. Connecticu and Eisenstadt v. Baird helped establish legal precedent invoking a ＂privacy framework＂ for subsequent cases including Roe v. Wade （as well as Doe v. Bolton and, more recently, Lawrence v. Texas）. This paper highlights the limitations of the privacy framework while exploring more potentially efficacious frames.     

政府信息公开与反公开的冲突及其消解

政府信息公开的本质就是保障公民的知情权。然而由于《政府信息公开条例》对个人隐私、商业秘密的概念、范围界定不明确,信息的价值属性,知情权与保密义务的矛盾等原因,使得政府信息公开与反公开的冲突在所难免。因此我们要适用人权保护、利益衡量、权利可克减、程序正当等原则;准确界定豁免公开的范围,建立信息安全、准确保障制度,完善信息豁免公开程序以及构建反公开诉讼机制,以合理有效地消解公开与反公开的冲突。     

Computer use monitoring and privacy at work

The rapid growth of new developments in communication technology has brought electronic monitoring to the forefront of today’s workplace concerns. This is an area that in recent years has drawn considerable attention amongst the media, academia and legal scholars demanding that employers do not intrude into employees’ online privacy via electronic monitoring in the workplace. However, electronic monitoring at work is not one-sided and it is arguable that employers have legitimate reasons to justify their action. This paper aims to examine employers’ justification for conducting electronic monitoring by highlighting the potential risk of financial and legal liabilities that employers may incur as a result of employees’ misuse of online services at work.     

场所搜查范围的判断基准——以宪法隐私权为视角

公民住宅不受侵犯是宪法所赋予我国公民的基本权利。该权利要求在对场所进行刑事搜查时应当根据一定的基准将其分为住宅和其他场所,并适用不同的搜查程序以体现出对公民住宅权利的保护。西方所普遍接受的隐私权理论为住宅和其他场所的界分提供了良好的理论基础,这一点在我国刑事立法存在空白的情况下具有尤为重要的借鉴价值。我国的司法实践应当采用宪法隐私权学说作为区分住宅和其他场所的理论基础,并在此基础上采用对公众的开放性原则作为判断基准。     

从“无私”到“隐私”——论我国隐私权观念之变

我国侵权责任法对隐私权的确认不是一个普通的法律事件,还是一个昭示时代精神转变的历史事件。在中国文化历史中,从宣扬＂无私＂到习惯＂疑私＂再到接受＂隐私＂,这是对人的自由的肯定。自由是当代法律的精神所在,也是隐私权制度的核心价值,换言之,隐私权就是自由生活的权利。     

隐私权的经济分析

隐私本质上是私人信息,隐私权是个人控制其私人信息的权利。无论隐私是否涉及到个人名誉,从对隐私的成本——收益分析来看,在权利的初始配置的意义上,都应当将控制私人信息的权利配置给信息生产者而形成隐私权。隐私权不能仅仅囿于人格权的范畴,而应该向其财产权性质方面着力发挥。将私人信息的权利配置给个人,个人就能够控制其私人信息从而形成对其私人信息的财产权,进而实现对隐私权更为切实的保护之目的。     

Why states have no right to privacy,but may be entitled to secrecy: a non-consequentialist defense of state secrecy

ABSTRACT

Despite an increase in initiatives aimed at enhancing political transparency, democratic states claim the right to withhold information from citizens: classified intelligence and military programs, diplomatic discretion, closed-door political bargaining, and bureaucratic opacity are examples. Can the state’s claim to restrict access to information be justified? In the first part of the essay, I focus on the arguments that defend the state’s claim to restrict access in terms of the state’s right to privacy where the state privacy is presented as a species of group privacy. While I concede that group privacy may be defended, I argue that governments and parliaments are not the kind of groups that may exercise privacy against citizens because of the relation of accountability in which they stand to citizens. In the second part of the essay, I propose an alternative argument to the effect that the scope of openness required in democratic governance is less extensive than traditionally assumed. I focus on the concept of democratic authority and argue that we can understand the practices of classification as an exercise of a special right to secrecy that is implied in the democratic state’s right to rule in a content-independent way.     

为婚前医学检查制度的重新设计建言

婚前医学检查应当自愿,但不能放任自流。准配偶之间的隐私权应当服从于知情权。未经婚前医学检查而结婚可能发生同代间、代际间的侵权悲剧。我国必须按照公共服务的原则重新设计婚前医学检查制度。婚前医学检查的费用应当由政府负担;对拒不接受婚前医学检查者应当在结婚证上予以写实性标注;婚前医学检查可以在结婚登记前适度提前进行;必须打破特定机构对婚检的垄断格局;应当充分使用“询问相关情况”的审查手段;政府必须为公民提供系统的婚姻保健服务;不宜采用特定区域“强制婚前医学检查”的做法。     

病历管理中的隐私权保护初探

隐私权作为患者众多权利中的一项非常重要的人格权理应受到法律的保护。处理好病历管理与隐私权之间的关系不仅可以使医学得到进一步的发展，而且可以促进隐私权相关立法的完善，同时还可以大幅度降低医疗纠纷的发生率。     

There's more to it than data protection – Fundamental rights,privacy and the personal/household exemption in the digital age

Heated debates triggered by the plans to introduce the “right to be forgotten” exposed problems the all-encompassing application of rules on data processing may cause in practice. The purpose of this article is to discuss the compatibility of these rules with the rapidly evolving online environment in the context of the need to guarantee human rights on the internet. The author argues that there is an imbalance in the protection of individual rights online. It results from the limited application of personal/household exception and, in general, the narrow understanding of the concept of online privacy. According to the author in order for data protection laws to flesh out not only the fundamental right of data protection, but also play a mediatory role in balancing other rights, the application of the personal/household exception should be extended to include private online activities. This would reflect the complex character of the very concept of online privacy, diversity of actors and activities shaping online “territories”, as well as the increasingly heterogeneous fabric of the Web.