上海大学学报(社会科学版) ›› 2022, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (1): 18-31.

• • 上一篇    下一篇

公民信息公平权益法律保障#br# 的完善路径#br#

  

  1. 山东大学 法学院
  • 收稿日期:2020-05-15 出版日期:2022-01-15 发布日期:2022-01-15

Routes of Improvement in Legal Protection of #br# Citizens’ Information Equity#br#

  1. School of Law, Shandong University,
  • Received:2020-05-15 Online:2022-01-15 Published:2022-01-15

摘要: 公民的信息公平权益是基于社会公平正义理念,公民在信息获取与处理过程中所享有的重要社会利益,具体包括信息平等获取、平等使用、公平分配和信息自由。由于数字化生活中社会主体的能力差异、智能科技的隐性歧视、政府市场决策的数字依赖等原因,公民主体间的信息公平失衡急剧凸显,并亟须进行“技术—法律”二元规制。针对当下该权益法律保障所存在的专门法规不足、忽视“数字人权”诉求、偏离公平的失衡样态以及缺乏可操作对策等问题,我们可对公民信息公平权益的法律保障进行如下完善:宏观方面,应基于权益损害现实,确立平等保护、倾斜保护、及时保护和合理保护原则,并将“设权保护”作为主要模式;微观方面,应从“软—硬”结合、“点—面”结合、“公—私”结合以及“权—义”结合出发建构权利体系,并从法律责任和司法救济两方面丰富法律救济。

关键词: 信息公平, 分配正义, “数字人权”, 信息权利

Abstract:  Citizens’ information equity, a concept derived from social equity and justice, is an important social interest enjoyed by citizens in acquiring and processing information, including equal access to information, equal use and fair distribution of information and information freedom. Due to various factors such as the competence differences of social entities in the digital life, the explicit discrimination of smart technologies and government and market’s reliance on digital technologies in the decision-making process, citizens’ information imbalance has been increasingly prominent, thus calling for urgent “technology-law” dual regulation. In response to the deficiencies in current legal protection of information equity, such as lack of targeted laws and regulations, the neglect of the appeal for “Digital Human Rights”, deviation from fairness, causes of imbalance and lack of feasible countermeasures, we can take the following measures for improvement. From the macro perspective, we should adhere to the principles of equal protection, preferential protection, timely protection and reasonable protection, and adopt the “right-setting protection” as the main protection mode. From the micro aspect, we should construct a system of rights, which can combine “soft-hard”, “point-surface”, “public-private” and “right-justice” dimensions, and enrich legal relief tools in terms of legal responsibility and judicial remedy.

Key words: information equity, justice in distribution, “digital human rights”, information rights

中图分类号: