政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/115977
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88987/118697 (75%)
Visitors : 23577800      Online Users : 205
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/115977


    Title: Press Freedom and Privacy Invasion of Reporters: Proper Conduct Performed in the Course of Business as Justification
    新聞自由與記者的侵犯隱私行為:以業務上正當行為的解釋為中心
    Authors: 許恒達
    Hsu, Heng-Da
    Contributors: 法律系
    Keywords: 隱私權;業務上正當行為;新聞自由;公共利益;相當理由
    Right to Privacy;Proper Conduct Performed in the Course of Business;Press Freedom;Public Interest;Probable Cause
    Date: 2017-06
    Issue Date: 2018-02-22 17:06:11 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本文討論記者採訪與報導行為若侵害隱私法益時,得否阻卻違法。有別於最高法院近期判決直接引用新聞自由作為阻卻違法的判斷準據,筆者主張應優先適用業務上正當行為,其認定以事前標準決定行為人是否依憑具特別資格或知識之專門性活動的行為準則與倫理規範;由於我國迄今記者新聞活動相關規定尚不完備,除了倫理公約所揭櫫的公共利益理由之外,僅能透過個案性衡量予以判定,但僅限於重大公共利益的理由才能發動侵害隱私的記者取材行為,而發動前必須滿足客觀證據效果的相當理由要求;至於記者刊登侵害他人隱私的新聞素材,也必須以保護重大公益為前提。
    This article aims to discuss whether a reporter who gathers information by invading other’s privacy and makes reports upon it could be justified. Taiwan’s Supreme Court found such conduct justified on account of reporter’s press freedom. Rather than this opinion, the author argues that, according to Article 22 of Taiwan’s Criminal Code, the justification ground employed preferentially should be "Proper Conduct Performed in the Course of Business". Therefore, in prior to conducting invasion of privacy for the sack of gathering news material, a reporter should collect some objective evidence inferring that the investigated event ought to be related to public interest. Such standard can also be applied to decide if reporter’s usage of materials gathered through privacy invasion could be lawful.
    Relation: 台大法學論叢, Vol.46, No.2, pp.589-664
    Data Type: article
    DOI link: http://dx.doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.2017.46.02.05
    DOI: 10.6199/NTULJ.2017.46.02.05
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Law] Periodical Articles

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    589-664.pdf1161KbAdobe PDF144View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback