通信权的宪法释义与审查框架--兼与杜强强、王锴、秦小建教授商榷

在"法院调取通话记录""交警查手机"等实践争议引导下,学者们借助基本权利限制的"保护范围—限制—限制的合宪性论证"的审查框架,推进了通信权的宪法释义。但将通话记录排除出通信权的保护范围,并不能有效解决实践难题,且因为过早窄化保护范围而会影响基本权利的保护效果。诉诸隐私权或者个人信息权的方案亦难以成立。应认识到《宪法》第40条存在因制宪者预见不足而产生的宪法漏洞。如果将"检查通信"理解为"示例性规定",则《宪法》第40条容有对通信权限制的其他可能性。在"通信内容"和"非内容的通信信息"分层构造下,可以建立起既能回应生活事实和实践争议,又能落实宪法严格保护目标的教义学体系和审查框架。基本权利个论的研究,有助于反思基本权利保护范围的"宽界定"或"窄界定",以及法律保留体系的普适性等基本权利总论问题。

The Interpretation of and Review Framework for Constitutional Correspondence Right: A Discussion with Professor Du Qiangqiang,Wang Kai and Qin Xiaojian

The interpretation of the correspondence right in the constitution has recently been enhanced by scholars in the light of the review framework of "scope of protection-limitation-justification of the constitutionality of the limitations," as a response to the disputes that have often arisen from practices of "courts retrieving call records" and "traffic police checking mobile phones." However, the exclusion of call records from the scope of correspondence right protection cannot meet the actual challenges, but may reduce the effect in the protection of such fundamental rights because of the premature narrowing of the scope of right. Resorting to the right of privacy or personal information cannot meet the challenges either. It should be recognized that Article 40 of the Constitution has loopholes due to the legislator’s imperfect foresight, for if "censor correspondence" is understood as an "exemplary provision," then Article 40 of the Constitution may admit of other possibilities to limit the right of correspondence. However, a distinction of the record in terms "content of correspondence" and "non-content of correspondence," can establish a legal doctrine and a framework for review, which can not only correspond with the facts of life, but also settle the practical disputes. Such a discussion over the fundamental rights can throw light not only on the "broad definition" or "narrow definition" of the scope of rights protection, but also on the universality of the legal theory of reservation of rights.