2010.9.17  高雄律師-楊岡儒律師

--

關於商業言論（Commercial Speech）；例如：涉及藥品（藥物）廣告或菸品廣告之情形），雖其本質上仍屬憲法第11條「言論自由」及第15條「人民財產權」之基本權保障範疇，然審酌其性質上屬於「商業上意見之表達（Possess the Characteristics of a Commercial Speech.）」與「獲得財產之經濟活動（Economic Activities）」之情形，因此，例如：以藥品廣告為例，大法官釋字414號理由書中即特別指出：「其中非關公意形成、真理發現或信仰表達之商業言論，尚不能與其他言論自由之保障等量齊觀。藥物廣告之商業言論，因與國民健康有重大關係，基於公共利益之維護，自應受較嚴格之規範。」故縱然肯認商業言論仍屬於憲法上言論自由之範疇，然而如涉及「人民權益（例如：健康權）」與「社會共同生活之法制保障本旨」之保障面向，基於公共利益維護與整體人民權益之保障（To Protect the Public Interest），該種商業性質之言論與其意見之表達，自應受較嚴格之規範或應具有符合比例原則下之合理適當限制。

以上見解，謹請參考

祝福大家安好與順心如意

兔寶寶律師  謹筆

2010.9.1.AM.2.32

大法官會議解釋：大法官釋字414號

解釋文：    

藥物廣告係為獲得財產而從事之經濟活動，涉及財產權之保障，並具商業上意見表達之性質，惟因與國民健康有重大關係，基於公共利益之維護，應受較嚴格之規範。藥事法第六十六條第一項規定：藥商刊播藥物廣告時，應於刊播前將所有文字、圖畫或言詞，申請省 (市) 衛生主管機關核准，指在確保藥物廣告之真實，維護國民健康，為增進公共利益所必要，與憲法第十一條及第十五條尚屬相符。又藥事法施行細則第四十七條第二款規定：藥物廣告之內容，利用容器包裝換獎或使用獎勵方法，有助長濫用藥物之虞者，主管機關應予刪除或不予核准，係依藥事法第一百零五條之授權，就同法第六十六條相關事宜為具體之規定，符合立法意旨，並未逾越母法之授權範圍，與憲法亦無牴觸。

理由書：   

藥物廣告係利用傳播方法，宣傳醫療效能，以達招徠銷售為目的，乃為獲得財產而從事之經濟活動，並具商業上意見表達之性質，應受憲法第十五條及第十一條之保障。言論自由，在於保障意見之自由流通，使人民有取得充分資訊及自我實現之機會，包括政治、學術、宗教及商業言論等，並依其性質而有不同之保護範疇及限制之準則。其中非關公意形成、真理發現或信仰表達之商業言論，尚不能與其他言論自由之保障等量齊觀。藥物廣告之商業言論，因與國民健康有重大關係，基於公共利益之維護，自應受較嚴格之規範。

J. Y. Interpretation No.414

Holding：

Drug commercials are economic activities engaged in by pharmaceutical manufacturers for the purpose of obtaining profits. These kinds of activities involve protection of property rights and possess the characteristics of a commercial speech. Because drug commercials are closely related to the health of nationals, they thus should be strictly regulated by law to protect the public interest. In order to ascertain the truthfulness of the drug commercial and to maintain the health of nationals, Article 66, Paragraph 1, of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act provides that before broadcasting the drug commercial, the pharmaceutical manufacturer should submit all writings, graphics, or words and phrases to the provincial (municipal) health authority for approval. This prior censorship requirement is necessary to protect the public interest and is consistent with Articles 11 and 15 of the Constitution. In addition, Article 47, Subparagraph 2, of Enforcement Rules of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act provides that by allowing the exchange of prizes with the drug containers or by granting awards, the content of drug commercials is likely to encourage consumers to use drugs abusively, the provincial (municipal) health authority thus should delete or disapprove of such content according to the authorization granted under Article 105 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act. Furthermore, Article 47, Subparagraph 2, of the Enforcement Rules of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act is promulgated to supplement the explicit requirements for the relevant matters governed by Article 66 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act, and complies with the legislative intent without exceeding the scope of authorization granted under Article 66 of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and is consistent with the Constitution.

Reasoning：

Through the mass media, drug commercials promote the beneficial effects of medical treatment for the purpose of soliciting sales. These drug commercials are economic activities engaged in by pharmaceutical manufacturers to obtain profits. By possessing the characteristics of a commercial speech, these drug advertisements should be protected under Articles 15 and 11 of the Constitution where freedom of speech is guaranteed. Freedom of speech is to protect the free flow of opinions so that people can acquire information and express themselves. The categories of speech protected under Articles 15 and 11 of the Constitution include political speech, academic speech, and commercial speech. The scope of protection and the level of restriction are different for the abovementioned three categories of speeches according to their characteristics. Being irrelevant to the formation of public opinion, fact-finding, or the expression of beliefs, commercial speech does not enjoy the high degree of protection afforded to the other categories of speeches. Because the commercial speech of drug advertisements is closely related to the health of nationals, it thus should be strictly regulated by law to protect the public interest.