平台言论审查:权源、困境及其突破

Online Platform Censorship:the Source of Power,Difficulties and Breakthrough

宪法不禁止网络平台对用户言论进行审查。在我国现行法秩序中,平台与用户间订立的一系列格式合同是网络平台言论审查的形式权力来源,散见于《网络安全法》《互联网信息服务管理办法》《网络信息内容生态治理规定》等规范性文件中的平台言论审查义务规范则是其实质权力来源。这种义务既不是私法中的安全保障义务,也不是由行政授权或委托产生的义务,而是行政法上的第三方义务,即政府指定的私主体所承担的必须将某种私人信息提供给行政机关或者由其本身采取行动防止有害行为发生的义务。其宪法基础为第35、51条和企业营业自由。未来应通过合宪性审查机制消除其间可能存在的合宪性疑虑。同时,在平台内救济方面引入比例原则和正当程序原则,在平台外救济方面完善第三方义务规范,以保障用户获致实质性救济。

The Constitution does not prohibit online platforms from censoring users'speeches.In the current legal order of our country,a series of format contracts signed between platforms and users are the formal source of power for online platform speech censorship,while the platform speech censorship obligations,which are scattered in normative documents such as“the Net⁃work Security Law”“the Internet Information Service Management Measures”and“the Regula⁃tions on the Ecological Governance of Network Information Content”,are the substantive source of power.This kind of obligation is neither a security guarantee obligation in private law nor an obligation arising from administrative authorization or delegation,but a third-party obligation in administrative law,that is,the obligation of a government designated private entity to provide certain private information to administrative agencies or take action to prevent harmful acts from occurring.Its constitutional basis is Articles 35 and 51,as well as freedom of business for en⁃terprises.In the future,possible constitutional doubts should be eliminated through the consti⁃tutional review mechanism.At the same time,the principle of proportionality and the principle of due process of law should be introduced in the field of remedies within the platform,and the third-party obligation norms should be improved in the field of remedies outside the platform to ensure that users receive substantive remedies.