英文摘要 |
Among the many disputes concerning preservation of our nation’s various cultural heritages, the monument category is the most controversial. That is because the property owner’s rights may be seriously affected or even damaged if his/her property were to be designated as a national monument by governmental due process. Furthermore, our Cultural Heritage Preservation Act (CHPA) stipulates that any offender shall be penalized by administrative penalties or by administrative criminal law. Therefore, the designation of any property as a monument is a serious matter to the property owner. Not only should the designating procedure be justifiable and transparently through a due process, but the definition of“what is a monument and its necessary accommodation area”must be both specific and crystal clear. Only the monument area definition is specific and crystal clear that the preservation sphere could be precisely divided and the rights of the owner are well-guarded and unlawful deeds avoided. Although the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act only defines“monument”in one of its provisions, its implication is significant. The author hopes that, through this research, the current ambiguity in the monument definition could be clarified and the task to preserve our precious cultural heritages be improved. |