公众人物理论与真实恶意规则之检讨

发布时间：2018-03-23 02:05

本文选题：公众人物　切入点：真实恶意规则　出处：《比较法研究》2015年05期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：近年来,美国法上的公众人物理论及真实恶意规则对我国理论界和实务界产生了深刻影响,这种现象是否合理,值得反思。真实恶意规则的适用主体包括公务员和公众人物。该规则源自于普通法上的诽谤规则难于有效保护言论自由和新闻自由的制度背景,诞生于民权斗争日趋高涨的时代背景,因而被寄予了通过优先保护言论自由来促进人权平等的"重任"。但是,一方面,公众人物理论缺乏明晰的内涵与判断标准,难以将其与普通私人妥当地区分开;另一方面,真实恶意规则的用词并不精确,其既不能妥当地保护个体的名誉,也不能周延地保护新闻媒体,而对言论自由的过度保护在实际效果上可能适得其反。当前我国并不存在类似的制度背景和时代背景,亦无通过优先保护言论自由来促进人权平等的迫切诉求。既有的规范框架足以妥当解决公众人物的名誉权与言论自由之间的冲突问题,引进公众人物理论及真实恶意规则并无必要。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the theory of public figures in American law and the rules of true malice have had a profound impact on the theoretical and practical circles of our country. Is this phenomenon reasonable or not? It is worth rethinking. The subject of the true malice rule, which includes civil servants and public figures, is derived from the institutional background in which defamation rules in common law are difficult to effectively protect freedom of expression and freedom of the press, Born in the background of the rising civil rights struggle, it has been placed on the "important task" of promoting human rights equality by giving priority to the protection of freedom of speech. However, on the one hand, the theory of public figures lacks clear connotations and standards of judgment. It is difficult to separate it properly from ordinary private individuals; on the other hand, the wording of the true and malicious rules is imprecise and does not adequately protect the reputation of the individual or the news media in a comprehensive manner, However, the over-protection of freedom of speech may be counterproductive in practical terms. At present, there are no similar institutional and contemporary backgrounds in our country. Nor is there an urgent need to promote human rights equality by giving priority to the protection of freedom of expression... the existing normative framework adequately addresses the conflict between the right to reputation of public figures and freedom of expression, It is not necessary to introduce the theory of public figures and the rules of true malice.
【作者单位】：厦门大学法学院;
【基金】：笔者主持的福建省社会科学规划项目“侵权责任能力制度原理及功能研究”(项目号:2014C140) 中央高校基本科研业务费项目“法典化背景下民事行为能力制度立法研究”(项目号:T2013221005)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】