言論自由與數位平台管制: 從人權法角度出發

Abstract

網際網路已成為現代社會中不可或缺的一環，在溝通、娛樂及基本需求方面提供了前所未有的便利。然而，其廣泛的影響力亦對於人們的數位權利，尤其是言論自由，構成了重大的挑戰。各國政府面臨著如何在享受網際網路帶來之益處的同時，妥善應對潛在有害之線上資訊。Google、Facebook 等私人數位平台，隨著網路重要性的提升，在塑造與管制線上言論上扮演著如同政府一般關鍵的角色。因此，如何在政府、數位中介、網路使用者此一三角關係中權衡各方利益並制定妥適管制模式係國家保障言論自由的重要課題。本文認為，於現今資訊發達的時代，若欲保障網路使用者在虛擬世界陳述意見之自由，言論自由的管制自應從人權保障之角度出發。文章透過探討聯合國、歐洲理事會及美洲國家組織有關言論自由保障之諸多條約、文件，並參酌我國國家傳播委員會草擬之《數位中介服務法草案》，以比較法之方式建構所謂人權導向之數位平台言論管制。本文於其中主張政府應作為框架制定者及監督者而非直接執行者，數位中介應負有人權保障義務，及用戶在網路言論監管中應享有自主權。文章最後對我國未來數位平台管制嘗試提出建議，強調在數位時代中尊重網際網路自主權並保障言論自由的必要性。

The Internet has become an essential part of modern society, providing convenience in communication, entertainment, and other aspects of daily life. However, this advancement, while providing unprecedented benefits, also presents significant challenges to digital rights, particularly in areas concerning freedom of expression. Governments worldwide are tasked with balancing the advantages of the Internet against the necessity of managing potentially harmful online content. With the Internet’s growing significance, private digital platforms such as Google and Facebook now assume regulatory roles similar to those of governments, enjoying great influence over online activities and speech. This thesis argues that, in today’s highly digitalized world, protecting users’ freedom to express themselves online and monitoring private service providers requires a regulatory approach grounded in human rights principles. The paper first underscored three crucial roles that digital intermediaries hold in the current digital era, as internet connectors, idea markets, and online architects, and the important need for a comprehensive regulatory framework. Afterwards, through comparative analysis of key reports and documents on freedom of expression from the United Nations, the Council of Europe, and the Organization of American States, the paper establishes what the author coined the “human rights approach” to intermediary regulation, and identifying two fundamental pillars, limited state interference, and positive human rights responsibilities of intermediary. Moreover, using Taiwan’s internet environment and Digital Intermediary Services Act draft as examples, this study highlights the importance of considering domestic contexts and draws out the third pillar of the human rights approach, user autonomy. The paper proposes that governments should serve as framework setters and overseers rather than direct enforcers, that digital intermediaries bear responsibilities to uphold human rights, and that users should maintain autonomy in online expression. The thesis concludes with the “human rights triangle”, underscoring the necessity of respecting internet autonomy and safeguarding freedom of expression in the digital era.