论宪法中的言论概念  

The Concept of Speech in the Constitution

作　　者：郑晓军 Zheng Xiaojun

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《人权研究（辑刊）》2021年第2期157-189,523,524,共35页Journal of Human Rights

摘　　要：宪法言论自由是否应解释为发表各种言论的自由?实践中对言论概念存在不少误读。解释言论自由的规范内涵,有必要区分宪法权利的调整范围与保障强度,发挥调整范围的“过滤网”功能,避免在言论限制问题上产生不必要的分歧。“公民有言论的自由”并不是指个体有想说什么就说什么的自由,其核心要义是防备公权力对公民言论的控制。判断某一言论是否由宪法调整,关键看其是否有被公权力侵害的风险,是否应被移出日常立法过程。由宪法调整私人言论不仅没有必要,而且存在相当程度的风险。由此,不应无限度地扩大宪法中言论概念的外延,对于言论歧视、监管现象,需确定其中是否存在公权要素。如果政府参与、协助、鼓励、授权或委托私人从事言论审查,那么可将私人行为视同国家行为而受到宪法约束。Should freedom of speech be interpreted as the freedom to express all kinds of speech?In practice,there are many misinterpretations of the concept of speech.To explain the connotation of freedom of speech in the constitution,it is necessary to distinguish the coverage from the protection.The significance of making such a distinction is to use the“filter”function of the coverage to exclude speech that should not be covered in the constitution at the beginning of the discussion,so as to avoid unnecessary disagreements on the restriction of speech.The core meaning of freedom of speech is to guard against the control of speech by the state.Therefore,to judge whether private speech should be regulated by the constitution,the key is to see whether speech has the risk of being infringed by the power and whether it should be removed from the legislative process.Allowing the constitution to regulate private speech is not only unnecessary,but also dangerous.Therefore,the concept of speech in the constitution should be subtracted rather than added.As for the speech discrimination and regulation between the private relations,it is necessary to determine whether there are elements of power such as government participation,assistance,encouragement,authorization or entrust,then the private action should be regarded as state action.

关 键 词：言论自由 宪法权利 法律关系 侵害风险 

分 类 号：D921[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]