兔寶寶法律事務所【高雄律師-楊岡儒律師的部落格】

2010.2.5  高雄律師-楊岡儒律師

--

關於言論自由之保障，乃法治國之基本原則，例如大法官釋字414號解釋，即涉及『藥物廣告』之部分，而針對其『商業上意見表達之性質』，雖屬言論自由之範疇，惟然審酌國民健康及公共利益之維護，故並非漫無限制，而涉及個別性質之審酌、不同保護之範疇及限制（The Scope of Protection and Restraints may Differ）。至於釋字577號該案之菸品廣告部份，亦揭示商品標示性質上屬於『提供商品客觀資訊之方式』，基於公共利益之衡酌，政府機關自得依照立法程序採取合理適當之限制(The government may adopt some more restrictive means through legislation)，達成充分保障人民之意旨。以下茲簡介言論自由及商業言論之憲法保障，也請大家參考喔。

大法官會議解釋：釋字第623號解釋文(節錄)

憲法第十一條保障人民之言論自由，乃在保障意見之自由流通，使人民有取得充分資訊及自我實現之機會，包括政治、學術、宗教及商業言論等，並依其性質而有不同之保護範疇及限制之準則。商業言論所提供之訊息，內容為真實，無誤導性，以合法交易為目的而有助於消費大眾作出經濟上之合理抉擇者，應受憲法言論自由之保障。惟憲法之保障並非絕對，立法者於符合憲法第二十三條規定意旨之範圍內，得以法律明確規定對之予以適當之限制，業經本院釋字第四一四號、第五七七號及第六一七號解釋在案。

J. Y. Interpretation No.623 (excerpts from the No.623)

Article 11 of the Constitution guarantees the people’s freedom of speech for the purposes of ensuring the free flow of opinions and giving the people the opportunities to acquire sufficient information and to attain self-fulfillment. Such protected speech may be political, academic, religious or commercial speech and, depending on the nature of the speech, the scope of protection and restraints may differ. In the case of commercial speech, if the information contained therein, which is provided for the purpose of lawful business and may help the consuming public to make economically sound decisions, is not false and misleading, it should then be subject to the constitutional protection of the freedom of speech. Nevertheless, the constitutional guarantee is not absolute. To the extent that Article 23 of the Constitution is complied with, the lawmakers may impose adequate restrictions by enacting clear and unambiguous laws. The foregoing has been made clear by this Court in J.Y.Interpretations Nos. 414, 577 and 617.

兔寶寶律師 謹筆  2010.2.4.PM.11.42