公共场所隐私权研究——法理、要素及类型

On the Privacy in Public Places-Jurisprudence,Elements and Types

传统观念认为公共场所和私人场所之间泾渭分明,隐私权保护也是"全有全无",两相结合,便产生了如下认知:隐私权只存在于私人场所,而公共场所无隐私。然而,科技进步与社会公共化趋势的加强模糊了公共场所与私人场所的界限,追踪窃听、偷拍偷录、视频监控现象的增多也引发了人们对公共场所隐私权的关注。私人生活在公共场所中延续,自由、自治、尊严在公共场所中亦存,有限度地承认并保护公民的公共场所隐私权已是时代发展所需。公共场所隐私权研究必须明确:这是一个事关隐私利益保护"程度"的问题,是判断公民的隐私期待合理性的问题,是时刻与其他权利(如自由权)利益衡量的问题,是跨越宪法和侵权法的基本人权问题。

One traditional view points out that there is a clear boundary between public places and private places, and it is either definite or negative about privacy. Combining with both, we get one conclusion ： Privacy exists only in private places, and not in public places. However, the strengthening of scientific progress and social publieization have blurred the boundary between public places and private places, Track eavesdropping, secretly recording and photographing, .video surveillance have also raised con- cerns about the privacy in public places. Private life continues in public places, freedom, autonomy, dignity also exist, it＇ s nec- essary for us to admit and protect a limited privacy of citizens in public places. For this, we must clear that it involves four questions ： this is a matter of concern about the degree of privacy protection ; this is a matter to judge the reasonable privacy expectation about citizens ; this is a matter to measure the other rights （ such as the freedom） all the time, and this is a matter to transcend constitutional and tort law.