本文探討歐洲人權公約第十條之案例法中，保護表現自由權及維護健康及道德如何平衡。本文認為，歐洲人權機構給予各簽約國廣泛之「判斷餘地原則」，因而其並未妥善保障表現自由權。然而歐洲人權法院認為限制墮胎資訊之提供乃是違反公約第十條之規定，此意見加強表現自由權之保護，同時其亦表示，即使是各簽約國之具爭議性之憲法規定，亦需接受歐洲人權法院之審查，而歐洲人權法院已開始走向成為「歐洲憲法法院」之路程。本文認為歐洲人權機構不應過度強調「判斷餘地原則」及「輔助性原則」，因為歐洲人權機構本身即為「歐洲共識」之產品，而其所施行者為「國際司法審查」，因而歐洲人權機構應以「比例原則」檢視各案件以建立「歐洲準則」。

This essay analyses how and where the European Commis-sion and Court of Human Rights draw the line between the guarantee of the right to freedom of expression and the protec-tion of health and morals by a detailed study of the case-law of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It ar-gues that the institutions of the Convention, by referring too much to the doctrine of margin of appreciation, limited the pro-tection of the right to freedom of expression. On the other hand, by judging that limiting the provision of abortion information did not comply with Article 10 of the Convention, the Court en-hanced the guarantee of the right. It also argues that the institutions should not put too much emphasis on the “principle of subsidiary” and the “doctrine of margin of appreciation,” as the institutions themselves have been the product of a “European consensus” exercising “international judicial review.” Rather, the institutions should apply the “doctrine of proportionality” and try to establish a “European standard” for protecting the right to freedom of expression.