欧洲人权法院实践中个人数据权与隐私权的关系

个人数据权与隐私权在欧洲区域被认为是两项独立的人权,但是囿于《欧洲人权公约》并未规定个人数据权的事实,欧洲人权法院通过保障隐私数据的方式将部分个人数据权纳入隐私权进行保障。实践中,欧洲人权法院通过扩大对“私生活”概念的解释,不仅将隐私数据认定为隐私权的保护对象,而且还将能够间接识别出个人身份的部分非隐私数据也纳入了隐私权的保障领域。欧洲人权法院通过保障隐私数据拓展了隐私权的保障范围,通过吸纳《关于个人数据自动化处理的个人保护公约》的标准确立了个人数据权的权利内容,使得两项权利实现互动。欧洲人权法院的实践表明,个人数据权源于隐私权,两者不仅在内容上存在交叉,而且都具有保障私生活自由的价值底蕴;同时由于个人数据权还承载一定的财产价值和公共属性,是对隐私权的继承和超越,两者在保障人的尊严层面达到统一。欧洲人权法院的实践对我国明确个人数据权保障体系的基本价值、落实个人数据权与隐私权的制度界分、厘清二者的适用关系具有重要的参考意义。

Procedural Transition in the Principle of the Best Interests of the Child in the Eyes of the European Court of Human Rights

The principle of the best interests of the child,as a criterion for substantive review,is conceptually ambiguous and uncertain in its application.To mitigate this dilemma in the application of the principle of the best interests of the child,the European Court of Human Rights(ECHR)has made a procedural transition in the interpretation and application of this principle,shifting from conducting specific proportionality analysis or interests balancing in cases related to children to examining whether States Parties have applied the principle of the best interests of the child in their judicial procedures.Moreover,ECHR has developed three procedural review schemes:holistic reviews,key factors-based reviews and factor list-based reviews.Compared with substantive reviews,procedural reviews adhere to the ECHR doctrine of margin of appreciation,restrict the free discretion of the court,give play to the effect of procedural autonomy,and pursue the value of subjective procedural justice,which has its own unique theoretical value and practical significance,and provides a feasible reference for China to interpret and apply the principle of the best interests of the child.

欧洲人权法院视野下儿童最大利益原则的程序性转向

儿童最大利益原则作为实质性审查标准存在概念的模糊性与适用的不确定性。为消解儿童最大利益原则的适用困境,欧洲人权法院在解释和适用儿童最大利益原则中呈现出程序性转向,舍弃对儿童案件进行具体的比例分析或利益平衡,转而审查缔约国是否在程序上适用儿童最大利益原则,并发展出整体式、关键要素式和要素清单式三重审查方案。较之实质性审查,程序性审查恪守欧洲人权法院的边际裁量原则,限制法院自由裁量,发挥程序自治效应,追求主观程序正义价值,有其独特的理论价值和实践意义,为我国解释和适用儿童最大利益原则提供一个可行方向。