正當平台程序作為網路中介者的免責要件：德國網路執行法的合憲性評析

A Due Process of Platforms as a Constitutional Requirement: An Analysis of German NetzDG from a Constitutional Law Perspective

在各國倍受假訊息困擾、竭力苦思應否重構媒體管制架構的此刻，德國 網路執行法就成為全球媒體法、網路法以及憲法學界的矚目焦點。本文即以 德國網路執行法為研究客體，審視該法的具體條文和規範架構，藉以分析該 法對於（網路）媒體的重新定位，是否仍相容於德國基本法的憲法秩序。 網路執行法明確反映出「出於營利意圖而提供第三方進行任意內容之傳 播且對之不負內容責任的網路平台，其科技條件與商業模式會擴大危害特定 刑法規範所欲保障的法益，而必須透過強化的平台程序來有效減緩」的規範 評價，而其所採取的法律遵循義務模式，則觸發了國家、社群網站和網站使 用者之間的多邊法律爭議，尤其是社群網站的內容審查是否過度侵害使用者 言論自由的疑慮。對此，本文回歸德國基本權釋義的層次，分析社群網站的 內容阻擋如何被視為國家行為，並進一步審視法遵式管制的必要性及衡平 性。本文認為，單純著眼於刑法利益有效執行、忽視使用者程序參與的單向 式規定，使得網路執行法必須承擔社群網站事權集中、營利導向的固有治理缺陷。但在相應修正之後，「以正當平台程序作為網路中介者免責要件」的網路執行法，標示了網路媒體管制典範變遷的起點。

In a moment, in which numerous countries are confronted with the challenge of disinformation and struggle with a new media regulatory framework, it seems rational and even necessary to make a thorough review of German Network Enforcement Act (Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechtsdurchsetzung in sozialen Netzwerken, NetzDG). In order to understand and evaluate NetzDG correctly from the perspective of comparative law, this essay analyzes its texts and its reformed regulatory framework carefully. German legislators reveal their following assessment clearly in the norms of NetzDG: Profit-seeking internet platforms, which enable users to share content with other users and do not bear content responsibility themselves, extend damages to certain penal coded-protected interests on the basis of their business operating models, so that a strengthened ''due process of platform'' is normatively legitimate and necessary to prevent these damages. Meanwhile, the compliance system NetzDG introduces triggers multilateralinterest conflicts between government, social network platforms and platform users, especially the serious doubt about content overblocking, or in other words, illegitimate infringement of freedom of speech of platform users through collateral censorship of regulated platforms. To deal with this question, this essay analyzes the normative status of platforms' actions from the aspect of dogmatics of German fundamental rights and further scrutinizes constitutionality of the current compliance system. In the author's opinion, the one-sided regulatory framework of NetzDG that only aims at effective enforcement of specific interests protected by German Penal Code and overlooks the right of participation of content providers, leads to an unconstitutional infringement of freedom of speech, for which the government is responsible via compliance system. Although the current version of NetzDG is unconstitutional for overly restricting freedom of speech of platform users according to this essay, the author believes that a revised NetzDG with better procedural protection can be the outset of a shift of media regulation paradigm.