| dc.contributor.advisor | 林永芳 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author (作者) | 盧丞莘 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author (作者) | Lu, Chen Shin | en_US |
| dc.creator (作者) | 盧丞莘 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator (作者) | Lu, Chen Shin | en_US |
| dc.date (日期) | 2011 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 17-四月-2012 09:29:25 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 17-四月-2012 09:29:25 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 17-四月-2012 09:29:25 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) | G0982630031 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/52832 | - |
| dc.description (描述) | 碩士 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 國立政治大學 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 俄羅斯研究所 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 98263003 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 100 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 本論文重要的目的，瞭解捷克轉型正義的特色與淨化法的施行。捷克轉型正義，發生在蘇聯解體、中東歐國家政治、經濟轉型的脈絡下。去共化和處理過去共遺緒問題，是中東歐國家轉型正義的重要任務，淨化法在如此政治環境下產生。捷克的淨化政策，由於國內政治非制度淨化，加上民主選舉過程，導致黑函滿天飛，所造成嚴重的政治問題，因而訂定的立法規範。這樣的背景下，淨化政策是一種特殊、臨時的政策工具。反映出當時轉型政治所面臨的困難，以及共黨政治轉型到民主政治之間，體系轉換的矛盾。此外，淨化政策也代表，當時捷克政治環境危機的解決方式。回到歷史的脈絡下來看，淨化政策是一種人事改革的手段，也是推動整體改革的基礎。解構舊有的權力結構，讓新民主有機會發展。 淨化政策在施行上，仍有許多爭議，包括可能侵害個人政治權力，以及被認為是一種對於共黨的報復手段，但淨化政策最重要的目標，是為建立特殊時期的改革基礎，也沒有具體的資料顯示，淨化政策會造成政治民主發展的傷害，相反的，淨化政策的施行得當，對於新民主的發展是有助益。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The most important purpose of this thesis is to understand the characteristics of the Czech transitional justice and Lustration Law. The Czech, as a Central and Eastern European countries, transitional justice occurred in the Post-Soviet with the political, economic restructuring context. Both "de-communism" and "the dealing with the past" is important task of the Transitional Justice in Central and Eastern European countries, and the Lustration Law implement in this background. Czech Lustration Law is result from wild lustration, because of democratic electoral system, leading to blackmail over the place, caused a serious political problem. Therefore, the legislators decided to make the law. Based on the above, the Lustration Law is a special, temporary policy tool. The situation reflects the challenges of political transition, and the communist political transition to a democratic system, is facing tremendous contradiction. In addition, the Lustration policy also represents a solution choice of the Czech political environment crisis. Lustration policy is a kind of a personnel reform policy, and promotes the overall reform. Destroy the former power structure, so that the new democracy has a chance to develop.Examining the Lustration policy, there is a lot of controversy. Including it may infringe the personal political right, and it’s considered as retaliation to the former political elite. However, the Lustration policies the most important goal is to establish the basis of a special period of reform. There is no specific evidence to show that Lustration Law will result in damage to the development of political democracy. On the other hand, lustration policy is implemented appropriately; it would be beneficial for the development of new democracy. | en_US |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章 緒論..............................................1第一節 研究動機與目的......................................2第二節 研究方法、途徑、範圍與限制............................4第三節 文獻回顧..........................................10第四節 章節安排..........................................20第二章 轉型正義意涵.......................................22第一節 概念界定..........................................22第二節 淨化法與轉型正義....................................35第三節 中東歐國家轉型正義..................................39第四節 小結.............................................54 第三章 捷克淨化法的制訂與施行...............................55第一節 捷克轉型正義.......................................56第二節 淨化法立法背景與制訂.................................65第三節 淨化法內容與施行 ...................................70第四節 小結..............................................78 第四章 捷克淨化法的成效與爭議...............................81第一節 淨化法的成效.......................................81第二節 淨化法的爭議.......................................97第三節 與斯洛伐克的比較...................................117第四節 小結.............................................124第五章 結論.............................................126第一節 結論.............................................126第二節 未來研究建議......................................134附錄一 捷克淨化政策相關年表................................136附錄二 捷克《淨化法》.....................................138附錄三 捷克《共黨政權非法性及對其反抗法案》...................148附錄四 赫爾辛基對捷克提出的備忘錄...........................151參考書目................................................162表目錄表1-3.1中東歐各國淨化政策一覽表…………………………….…..49表3-3.1捷克在1992年與1996年大選的主要政黨得票率………...78表3-4.1布拉格之春受難人數………………………………………...79表4-1.1聯邦議會 72位支持法案議員，提及淨化政策目標的比…..83表4-1.2捷克淨化政策評估1991-2001………………………………..89表4-1.3捷克淨化政策目標實現的影響因素………………………….90表4-1.4中東歐國家淨化政策與民主關係…………………………….95表4-1.5中東歐國家自由狀況………………………………………….95表4-1.6中東歐國家施行淨化政策進程……………………………….96表4-2.1捷克受淨化成員的政治意識（是否具有黨員身分）……….107 | zh_TW |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.source.uri (資料來源) | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0982630031 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 捷克轉型正義 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 淨化法 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 淨化政策 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 去共化 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 中東歐國家轉型正義 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 轉型正義 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Transitional Justice in the Czech | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Lustration Law | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Lustration | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | de-communism | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Transitional Justice in Post-Communist Europe | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Transitional Justice | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | 捷克轉型正義與淨化法之研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title (題名) | A study of transitional justice and lustration law in the Czech Republic | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | thesis | en |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 一、中文專書 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 仁德厚，1999，《政治學》，台北，三民。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 吳 庚，2010，《行政法之理論與實用》，台北，三民。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 李英明，2005，《制度主義與社會資本》，台北，志揚。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 李惠宗，2006，《憲法要義》，台北，元照。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 李邁先，1991，《東歐諸國史》，台北：三民書局。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 沈宗靈，2007，《法理學》，台北：五南。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 周力行，2008，《捷克史：波西米亞的傳奇》，台北：三民。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 洪美蘭，2002，《經濟激進轉型策略-中東歐之經驗與啟示》，台北：翰蘆。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 俞寬賜，2002《國際法新論》，台北：國立編譯館。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 高永光，2004，〈國家論〉，陳義彥主編，《政治學》，台北：五南。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 徐永明主編，2008，《轉型，要不要正義？》，台北，台灣智庫。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 黃 默主編，2007，《人權字典》，台北，教育部。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 趙敦華，1988，《勞斯的（正義論）解說》，台北，遠流。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 鄭曉時、戴 華編，1991，《正義及其相關問題》，台北，中央研究院。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 劉清波，1992，《社會主義國家法則》，台北，黎明文化。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 蕭全政，2006，《政治與經濟的整合》，高雄：桂冠。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 蘇俊雄，1990，《法治政治》，台北：中正。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 二、中文譯書 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Arendt, Hannah著，蔡佩君譯，2008，《責任與判斷》，台北：左岸。譯自Responsibility and Judgment. 2003. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Buchanan, James著，方世杰譯，1992，《自由‧市場與國家》，台北：五南。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Diamond, Larry. & Marc Plattner著，田弘茂、朱雲漢譯，《新興民主的機遇與挑戰》，台北：張榮發基金會國政策研究中心。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Goldman, Minton著，楊淑娟譯，2001，《中、東歐的革命與變遷：政治、經濟與社會的挑戰》，臺北市：編譯館。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Gustav, Radbruch著，王怡蘋、林宏濤譯，2000，《法學導論》，台北：商周。譯自Einführung in die Rechtswissenschaft. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Heywood, Andrew著，楊日青、李培元、林文斌、劉兆隆譯，2001，《政治學新論》，台北：韋伯文化。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Huntington, Samuel P.著，劉軍寧譯，1994，《第三波：二十世紀末的民主化浪潮》，台北：五南。譯自The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. 1991. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kissinger, Henry著 顧淑馨、林添貴譯，1998，《大外交》，台北：智庫文化。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Lijphard, Arend著，陳坤森譯，1993，《當代民主類型與政治》，台北：桂冠。譯自Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-One Countries.Yale University Press. 1984. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Marsh, David& Gerry Stoker著，陳菁雯、葉銘元、許文柏譯，1998，《政治學方法論》，台北：韋伯。譯自Theory and Methods in Political Science. St.Martin’s Press.1995. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Nordlinge, Eric著，蕭全政譯，1988，《民主國家的自主性》，台北：國民大會憲政研討委員會。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Pogge, Thomas 著，顧肅、劉雪梅譯，2010，《羅爾斯與『正義論』》，台北：五南。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Posner, Richard 著，蘇力譯，2002，《超越法律》，台北：元照。譯自Overcoming law. Harvard: Harvard Press. 1995. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Posner, Richard 著，蘇力譯，2002，《法理學問題》，台北：元照。譯自 The Problem of Jurisprudence. Harvard Press. 1995. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Potter, David. Goldbalt David, Margaret Kiloh, & Paul Lewis著，王謙、李昌麟、林賢治、黃惟饒譯，2000，《民主化的歷程》，台北：韋伯。譯自Democratization. Polity Press. 1997. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Sandel,Michae 著，樂為良，2011，《正義：一場思辨之旅》，台北：雅言文化 Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Sørensen, George 著，李酉潭、陳志瑋譯，2000，《最新民主與民主化》，台北：韋伯。譯自Democracy and Democratization: procesesand prospects in a changing. Westview Press. 1998. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Teitel, Ruti 著，鄭純宜，2001，《變遷中的正義》，台北：商周。譯自Trasitional justice. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 2000. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Tutu, Desmond Milo著，江紅譯，2005，《沒有寬恕就沒有未來》，台北：左岸。譯自No Future without Forgiveness. 1999. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 三、中文學位論文 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 江子楊，2010，《俄羅斯與台灣轉型正義之比較研究》，台北，政治大學俄羅斯研究所碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 姜惠如，2010，《公民社會在捷克民主轉型過程中之角色討論》，台北，東吳大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 黃兆年，2008，《轉型正義在台灣政經發展中的角色定位》，台北，台灣政治大學政治學研究所碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 羅立佳，2008，《轉型正義的政治性重探：正義之名下的民主、秩序時間形構》，新竹，國立交通大學文化與社會研究所碩士論文。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 四、中文期刊 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 江宜樺，2007，〈台灣轉型正義及其省思〉，《思想》，5：65－81。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 吳乃德，2009，〈服從權威是邪惡的根源？〉，《思與言》，47(3)：1-25。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 洪茂雄，1997，〈後共產主義時期捷克的政治發展─民主化與歐洲化〉，《問題與研究》，36(9)：13-25。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 胡婉玲，2001，<論歷史制度主義的制度變遷理論>，《新世紀智庫論壇》， 16：86-95。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 郭艷，2009，〈新興民主政體轉型正義難題〉，《南京工業大學學報》，社會科學版， 8(1)：5-9。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 黃宗昊，2010，〈歷史制度論的方法立場與理論建構〉，《問題與研究》，49(3)：145-169。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 葉浩，2008，〈價值多元是轉型正義理論:一個政治哲學路徑的嘗試〉，《台灣政治學刊》， 12(1)：11－51。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 蔡相廷，2010，〈歷史制度主義的興起與研討取向─政治學研究途徑的探討〉，《台北市立教育大學學報》，41(2)：39-76。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 嚴震生，2006，〈真相調查委員會與轉型正義〉，《校園》，48(6)：39-43。 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 五、英文專書 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Amadiume,Ifi & Abdullahi A. An-Na`im’ 2000. The Politics of Memory: Truth, Healing and Social Justice. London: Zed Books. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Elster, Jon. 2004. Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Cambridge：Cambridge University Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Everett J.Worthington. 2005. The Power of Forgiveness. MA: Paraclete Press | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hatschikjan, Magarditsch. Dušan Relji and Nenad Šebek. 2005. Disclosing hidden history:Lustration in the Western Balkans. Greece: Center for Democracy and Reconciliation in Southeast Europe. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hayner, Priscilla B. 2002. Unspeakable Truths NewYork: Routledge. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Helmick, Raymond G. & Rodney L. Petersen. 2002. Forgiveness and Reconciliation. Pennsylvania:Templeton Foundation Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kritz, Neil J. Edited. 1995. Transitional Justice：How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes Volume I、II、III. Washington DC:United States Institute of Peace. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Lederach, john paul. 2008. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington, DC: United State Institute of Peace. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Mayer-rieckh, Alexander. & Pablo De Greiff. Edited. 2007. Justice as Prevention: Vetting Public Employees in Transitional Societies. New York: Social Science Research Council. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Nalepa, Monika. 2010. Skeletons in the Closet: Transitional Justice in Post-Communist Europe. New York：Cambridge University Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Orenstein, Mitchell A. Stephen Bloom, and Nicole Lindstrom. 2008. Transnational | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | actors in central and east European transitions （Pittsburgh：Pittsburgh University Press） | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Paris, Roland. 2004. At War’s End. Cambridge University Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Pithar, Petr. 2006. Transformation: he Czech Experience. Prague: the Ministry of Foreign Afairs of the Czech Republic. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Quinn, Joanna R. 2009. Reconciliation(s) : transitional justice in postconflict societies. Montréal : McGill-Queen`s University Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Rosenberg, Tina. 1995. The Haunted Land : Facing Europe`s Ghosts After Communism. New York : Random House. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Teitel, Ruti. 2000. Transitional Justice. New York: Oxford University Press. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Tutu, Desmond Milo. 1999. No Future without Forgiveness. New York: Doubleday. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Wiesenthal, Simon. 1998. The Sunflower: On the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness. New York: Random House Inc. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Yusuf, Hakeem O. 2010. Transitional justice, Judicial Accountability and the Rule of Law. New York: Routledge. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 六、英文專書論文： | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Blažek, Petr. 2006.”Transitions to Democracy and the ‘Lustration’ Screening Process.” In Transformation: the Czech Experience, the Ministry of Foreign Afairs of the Czech Republic Prague. pp.173-180. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Gonzalez-Enriquez, Carmen. 2002 "De-communization and Political Justice in Central and Eastern Europe" In The Politics of Memory. Brito, Alexandra Barahona De , Carmen Gonzalez Enriquez ,and Paloma Aguilar Ed. New York: Oxford University. pp.218-247. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Havel, Vaclav. 1992. "The Power of the Powerless." In Open Letters: Selected Writing 1965-1990. New York: Vintage. pp.125-214. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Horne, Cynthia M. & Margaret Levi. 2004. "Does Lustration Promote Trustworthy Governance? An Exploration of the Experience of Central and Eastern Europe" In Building a Trustworthy State in Post-Socialist Transition. Kornai, Janos & Susan Rose-Ackerman. ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp.52-74. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Letki, Natalia. 2004. "The Consequences of Lustration for Democratisation: The Experience of East Central Europe." In Past and Present: Consequences for Democratisation. Hatschikjan, Magarditsch & Noack-Aetopulos Corinna ed. Center for Democracy and Reconciliation in Southeast Europe. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Méndez, Juan E. 2001.“In Defense of Transitional Justice.” In Transitional Justice and the Rule of Law in New Democracies. Indiana: University of Notre Dame. Linden, Ronald. 2011. “EU Accession and the Role of International Actors.” In Central and East European politics: from communism to democracy. Wolchik, Sharon L. and Jane L. Curry. Ed. Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. pp. 125-139. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Nedelsky, Nadya. 2009. “Czechoslovakia and the Czech and Slovak Republics.” In Transitional Justice in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Stan, Lavinia. Ed. New York: Routledge. pp.37-75. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Priban, Jiri. 2007. “Oppressors and Their Victims: The Czech Lustration and Rule of Law.” In Justice as Prevention: Vetting Public Employees in Transitional Societies. Mayer-rieckh, Alexander. & Pablo De Greiff. ed. New York: Social Science Research Council. pp.308-346. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Schwartz, Herman. 1995.“Memorandum from Helsinki Watch and Others to the Constitutional Court of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic in the Matter of the Constitutionality of Act No. 451/1991 (1992)”In Transitional Justice volumeⅢ. Kritz, Neil. ed. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace. pp.335-345. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Stan, Lavinia. 2009. “Introduction: Post-communist transition, justice, and transitional justice” In Transitional Justice in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Stan, Lavinia. Ed. New York: Routledge. pp.1-14. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Stan, Lavinia. 2009. “Conclusion: Explaining country differences” In Transitional Justice in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Stan, Lavinia. Ed. New York: Routledge. pp.247-270. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Zacek, Pavel. 2004. "The case of Czechoslovakia and the Czech Republic." In Past and Present: Consequences for Democratisation. Hatschikjan, Magarditsch & Noack-Aetopulos Corinna ed. Center for Democracy and Reconciliation in Southeast Europe. pp.9-11. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 七、英文期刊 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Anderlini, Sanam Naraghi, Camille Pampell Conway and Lisa Kays. 2007. "Transitional Justice and Reconciliation." Inclusive Security, Sustainable Peace: A Toolkit for Advocacy and Action , 4:1-15 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Booth, W. James. 2001. “The Unforgotten: Memories of Justice.” American Political Science Review, 95(4): 777-791 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Cohen, Stanley. 1995. “State Crimes of Previous Regimes: Knowledge, Accountability, and the Policing of the Past.”Law & Social Inquiry, 20(1): 7-50 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | David, Roman. 2003. “Lustration Laws in Action: The Motives and Evaluation of Lustration Policy in the Czech Republic and Poland (1989-2001).” Law & Social Inquiry, 28(2): 387-439 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | David, Roman. 2004. “Transitional Injustice? Criteria for Conformity of Lustration to the Right to Political Expression.” Europe-Asia Studies, 56(6):789-812 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | David, Roman. & Susanne Y. P. Choi . 2005 “Victims on Transitional Justice: Lessons from the Reparation of Human Rights Abuses in the Czech Republic.” Human Rights Quarterly, 27(2): 392-435 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | David, Roman. & Susanne Y. P. Choi. 2006.”Forgiveness and Transitional Justice in the Czech Republic.” The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50(3): 339-367 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Dimitrijević, Nenad. 2006.“Justice beyond Blame: Moral Justification of (the Idea of) a Truth Commission.” Journal of Conflict Resolutio,. 50( 3): 368-382 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Ellis, Mark. 1996. “Purging the past: The Current State of Lustration Laws in the Former Communist Bloc.”Law and Contemporary Problems, 59(4) : 181-196 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Elster, Jon. 2006.“Redemption for Wrongdoing: The Fate of Collaborators after 1945.” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50( 3): 324-338 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Esquith, Stephen. 1999. “Toward a Democratic Rule of Law: East and West.” Political Theory, 27( 3): 334-356 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hall, Peter A. & Rosemary C. R. Taylor. 1996. “Political Science and the Three New Institutionalism” Political Studie, 44: 936-957 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hanley,Seán. 2005."A Review Article: The Origins of Postcommunist Elites: From the Prague Spring to the Breakup of Czechoslovakia by Gil Eyal " Europe-Asia Studies, 57(2):355-357 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Hilde, Paal Sigurd. 1999. “Slovak Nationalism and the Break-Up of Czechoslovakia.” Europe-Asia Studies, 51(4): 647-665 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Huyse, Luc. 1995. “ Justice after Transition: On the Choices Successor Elites Make in Dealing with the Past. “Law & Social Inquiry, 20(1): 51-78 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kaminski, Marek M. Monika Nalepa, and Barry O’neill. 2006.“Normative and Strategic Aspects of Transitional Justice.” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50( 3): 295-302 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kaminski, Marek M. and Monika Nalepa. 2006.“Judging Transitional Justice: A New Criterion For Evaluating Truth Revelation Procedures.”Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50( 3): 383-408. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Killingsworth, Matt. 2010. “Lustration in Poland: Coming to Terms with a Totalitarian Past”,Communist and post-Communist studies, 43:275-284. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Kosař, David. 2008. “Lustration and Lapse of Time: ‘Dealing with the Past’ in the Czech Republic.” European Constitutional Law Review, 4(3): 460-487 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Letki, Natalia. 2002. “Lustration and Democratisation in East-Central Europe.” Europe-Asia Studies, 54(4): 529-552 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Letki, Natalia. 2004. “Socialization for Participation? Trust, Membership, and Democratization in East-Central Europe.” Political Research Quarterly, 57(4): 665-679 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Łoś, Maria. 1995. “Lustration and Truth Claims: Unfinished Revolutions in Central Europe” Law & Social Inquiry, 20(1): 117-161 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Nalepa, Monika. 2005. "Lustration and the Survival of Parliamentary Parties." Taiwan Journal of Democracy. 5(2): 45-68 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Nedelsky, Nadya. 2004. “Divergent Responses to a Common past: Transitional Justice in the Czech Republic and Slovakia.” Theory and Society, 33(1): 65-115 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Posner, Eric. & Adrian Vermeule. 2004. “Transitional Justice as Ordinary Justice.” Harvard Law Review. 117(3): 761-825 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Shabad, Goldie &Kazimierz M. Slomczynski. 2002. “The Emergence of Career Politicians in Post-Communist Democracies: Poland and the Czech Republic.” Legislative Studies Quarterly, 27( 3): 333-359 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Siegel, Richard. 1998. “Transitional Justice: A Decade of Debate and Experience.” Human Rights Quarterly, 20(2): 431-454 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Welsh, Helga. 1996. “Dealing with the Communist past: Central and East European Experiences after 1990.” Europe-Asia Studies, 48(3): 413-428 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Williams, Kieran. &Brigid Fowler. 2003. “Explaining Lustration in Easter Europe: A Post-communist politics approach.” Sussex European Institute. Working Paper No:62 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Zake, Ieva. 2010. “Politicans Versus Intellectuals in the Lustration Debates in Transitional Latvia” Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, 26(3):389-412 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 八、網路資訊 | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | ILOLEX（database of international labour standards ）：〈http://www.ilo.org/ilolex | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | /english/index.htm〉(2011.11) | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | “Representation (article 24) - Czech and Slovak Federal Republic - C111 - 1992 ---- Report of the Committee set up to examine the representation made by the Czech and Slovak Confederation of Trade Unions (CS-KOS) under article 24 of the ILO Constitution alleging non-observance by the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111)” | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 〈http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/pdconv.pl?host=status01&textbase=iloeng&document=116&chapter=16&query=(Czech+Republic%2CCzechoslovakia)+%40ref&highlight=&querytype=bool&context=0〉(2011.11) | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Puddington, Arch. 2011 "Freedomin the World 2011: the Authoritarian Challenge to Democracy" Freedom House’s annual survey of political rights and civil liberties. | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 〈http://www.freedomhouse.org .〉(2011.12) | zh_TW |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | Wilke, Christine. 2002. “Politics of Transitional Justice：German Hungarian and Czech Decisions on expost fact Punishment” New school University, In 〈http://www.gdrc.org/ngo/peter-willets.html. 〉(2011.10) | zh_TW |
