為達最佳瀏覽效果,建議使用 Chrome、Firefox 或 Microsoft Edge 的瀏覽器。

請至Edge官網下載 請至FireFox官網下載 請至Google官網下載
晴時多雲

限制級
您即將進入之新聞內容 需滿18歲 方可瀏覽。
根據「電腦網路內容分級處理辦法」修正條文第六條第三款規定,已於網站首頁或各該限制級網頁,依台灣網站分級推廣基金會規定作標示。 台灣網站分級推廣基金會(TICRF)網站:http://www.ticrf.org.tw

《TAIPEI TIMES》Constitutional Court narrows definition of libel

Constitutional Court head clerk Hsu Chen-chou, left, and spokesman Chang Yung-hung address a news conference at the court in Taipei yesterday.
Photo: Wang Yi-sung, Taipei Times

Constitutional Court head clerk Hsu Chen-chou, left, and spokesman Chang Yung-hung address a news conference at the court in Taipei yesterday. Photo: Wang Yi-sung, Taipei Times

2023/06/10 03:00

WILLFUL NEGLIGENCE: The state has a justifiable interest in upholding democracy by punishing people who spread false statements about public matters, a professor said

By Wu Cheng-feng and Jonathan Chin / Staff reporter, with staff writer

The Constitutional Court yesterday ruled against decriminalizing defamation, but narrowed the scope of the crime to intentionally making a false statement and displaying gross negligence in verifying a statement’s truthfulness before dissemination.

Disseminating a false statement cannot be considered libel or slander if there was a reasonable effort to verify its truthfulness, the court’s abstract for Constitutional Judgement No. 8, 2023, says.

This means that the burden is on prosecutors to prove intent or negligence on the part of the defendant, it said.

Defamation is defined by the Criminal Code as a reputationally injurious statement that is false or about a matter of no concern to the public, said Judicial Yuan President Hsu Tzong-li (許宗力), who also serves as the court’s presiding judge.

Information or evidence disseminated following a reasonable process of investigation and verification is exempt from defamation, even if untrue, he said.

The standard of tenability should be determined on an individual basis after weighing the right to reputation with the right to the freedom of speech, which are equally protected under the Constitution, he said.

When applied according to the above standards, the penalty for defamation does not contravene the constitutional principle of proportionality, he said, citing a precedent established by Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 509.

The court on March 14 heard the debate for Chu Cheng-sheng (朱長生) et al versus the Judicial Yuan, which brought about the constitutional judgement.

The Judicial Yuan at the time said that the doctrine of legislative supremacy that grants precedence to the legislature’s authority to make laws over the courts should be applied to any conflict between the right to free speech and the right to reputation and privacy.

Individual liberties are sufficiently protected by the standards of actual malice and negligence established in Interpretation No. 509 and the due process of the criminal justice system, it said.

Defamation laws are widely utilized in other nations, and the right to protection against attacks on reputation needs to be upheld under current social conditions, it said.

The state has a justifiable interest to uphold democracy by punishing people who spread false statements about public matters to injure the reputation of others, National Taipei University professor of law Hsu Yu-an (徐育安) said.

The judgement, which excludes good-faith errors from punishment and targets those who intentionally spread falsehoods, is in keeping with the spirit of Interpretation No. 509 to limit state inference on speech, he said.

However, Hsu Chia-shin (許家馨), an assistant research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institutum Iurisprudentiae, said that empirical evidence has shown that Interpretation No. 509’s definition of reasonableness is not clear to law practitioners.

The knowledge of falsehood or willful blindness toward it should be the defining element of criminal defamation, she said.

Interpretation No. 509 needs to be expanded to reconcile different opinions about the standard for the crime of defamation, National Human Rights Commission member Kao Yung-cheng (高涌誠) said.

新聞來源:TAIPEI TIMES

不用抽 不用搶 現在用APP看新聞 保證天天中獎  點我下載APP  按我看活動辦法

焦點今日熱門
看更多!請加入自由時報粉絲團

網友回應

載入中
此網頁已閒置超過5分鐘,請點擊透明黑底或右下角 X 鈕。