| Summary: | 碩士 === 世新大學 === 行政管理學研究所(含博、碩專班) === 97 === After the abolition of the Publication Law in 1999, the authority of rating and classifying publications was transferred to two non-profit organizations (NPOs), namely the R.O.C Publication Appraisal Foundation and the Chinese Association of Self-regulating Publications. This thesis reviews the background and function of the two NPOs, with particular emphasis on the standards and procedure that they have in deciding the rating of controversial publications. In this way, this thesis tries to discuss the issues of representation, transparency and accountability regarding NPOs that plays an increasingly important role in public governance.
This thesis also finds that there are still some unsolved problems embedded in the current publication classification practice. For example, the stated penalty of violating the classification rules in the Child and Juvenile Welfare Law is too severe, whereas the enforcement of the law is too loose, making the publication classification system a symbolic one. On the other hand, Article 235 of the Criminal Law still grants the police the authority to arbitrarily investigate publications, causing great puzzlement to some publishers or book dealers. These upper-level conflicts regarding the function/evil of publication classification per se seriously limit the role and agency of the NPOs discussed in this thesis.
|
|---|
