欧洲人权法院关于在公共场所穿戴蒙面服饰的最新法理——基于“S.A.S.诉法国”案的分析

The Latest Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights on Prohibiting Concealment of One's Face in Public:An Analysis of Case “S.A.S. v. France”

"S.A.S.诉法国"案涉及法国立法禁止在公共场所穿戴蒙面服饰是否违反《欧洲人权公约》的问题。在本案中,欧洲人权法院修正了相关判例法,驳回了法国有关穿戴蒙面服饰与性别平等和人性尊严相关的主张。尽管如此,法院还是以比较宽松的标准通过了对法国立法的合理性和必要性审查。一方面,法院对公约限制条款进行扩张解释,支持了法国以"共同生活"为限制理由的合理性辩护;另一方面,在评估立法禁止蒙面服饰必要性的问题上,法院保持司法克制并授予法国宽泛的自由裁量余地。欧洲人权法院扩张解释和司法克制具有内在的统一性。欧洲社会现实、缔约国对特定国内情势下的社会政策选择以及欧洲人权法院与缔约国关系,是欧洲人权法院扩张解释和司法克制的重要影响因素。

The Case S.A.S. v. France involves the issue whether the French law prohibiting the concealment of one's face in public places violates the European Convention of Human Rights.In its judgment of this case,the European Court of Human Rights rejects France's argument that the law could be used to protect the values of respect for gender equality and protection of human dignity. Nevertheless,the Court applies a loose standard in approving the legitimacy and necessity review of the relevant French law. With the help of an expansive explanation of the limitation clause of the European Convention of Human Rights,the Court accepts the legitimacy of the 'living together'claims by France. Meanwhile,the Court exercises a degree of restraint and gives France wide margin of appreciation when reviewing the necessity of the French law prohibiting the concealment of one's face in public places.The combined use of the Court of both expansive explanation and judicial restraint in this case is decided by the social realities in Europe,the social policy choice in France and the relationship between the Court and the Contracting Parties.