......接續前文......

PUBLIC MEDIAS
Over the period, was/were there (yes/no):
32. A state monopoly of TV?
33. A state monopoly of radio?
34. A state monopoly of printing or distribution facilities?
35. Government influence on the state-owned media’s editorial line in its favour?
36. Improper sackings of journalists in the state-owned media?
37. Fair opposition access to state-owned media?

ECONOMIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE PRESSURE
Over the period, was/were there (yes/no):
38. Use of withdrawal of advertising (government stops buying space from some papers/broadcasters or pressures private firms to boycott media outlets)?
39. Undue restriction of foreign investment in the media?
40. A licence needed to start up a newspaper or magazine?
41. Strictly-controlled access to journalistic profession (compulsory certificate or training, membership of journalists’ institute etc.)?
42. Serious threats to news diversity, including narrow ownership of media outlets? Give it a score from 0 (no threat) to 5 (very serious threat)?
43. A government takeover of privately-owned media, either directly or through firms it controls?
44. Independent or opposition news media (not including media outlets in exile)?

THE INTERNET AND NEW MEDIA
Over the period, was/were there (yes/no):
45. A state monopoly of Internet service providers (ISPs)?
46. ISPs forced to filter access to news, cultural, social or political websites (not including pornography or gambling websites)?
47. Websites shut down after pressure on ISPs?
48. ISPs legally responsible for the content of websites they host?
49. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers imprisoned (how many?)
50. Cyber-dissidents or bloggers harassed or physically attacked (how many?)

　　綜合起來，就是以：（一）新聞媒體從業人員有無受迫害？（二）有無新聞審查制度，包括國家介入公共媒體的程度為何？（三）新聞媒體的自律程度？（四）是否出現新媒體（包括網路民主與部落客的報導）？等項評估指標為主。本研究小組加以參考並修正後，認為可以是指：

　　（一）有無新聞媒體從業人員因為報導內容而受迫害？如果有，就是新聞媒體的獨立性不足；反之，則否。

　　（二）有無新聞審查制度，包括國家介入公共媒體的程度為何？如果有新聞審查制度，就是新聞媒體的獨立性不足；反之，則否。至於，國家介入公共媒體的程度，則必須再予以評估其介入的程度，是否符合新聞自由的界限，尤其是檢視其法律規範的合理性。

　　（三）新聞媒體的自律程度？如果有完整的新聞媒體自律機制，就代表新聞媒體的獨立性充足；反之，則否。

　　（四）是否出現新媒體（包括網路民主與部落客的報導）？如果是，即表示新聞媒體的獨立性充足；反之，則否。

　　其三，有關公職人員財產申報透明化的評估指標，本研究小組參考《世界銀行》所建構的指標後，發現即有[1]：

1. Was this the first time such a law / rule was passed, or is this rule / law linked with any earlier one?
2. Does the Constitution mandate public officials to disclose their assets?
3. To what categories of civil servants or appointed officials is this law / rule applicable?
4. To what categories of elected officials is this law / rule applicable?
5. If this law / rule is applicable only to appointed officials in top levels, what is the assets declaration requirement of general appointed officials?
6. Do provincial and local employees follow the sameor similar assets declaration law?
7. Do civil servants need to file the information during first entry into public service? 8. And, thereafter at what frequency?
9. Can the declaration be filed electronically?
10. What kind of / value of assets must be declared?
11. Is it necessary to include family members’ assets as well?
12. Which agency of government receives and processes public officials’ assets declaration?
13. If the officials has failed to submit declaration in time or made inconsistent declaration, does the declaration processing authority issue reminder or ask for clarifications / explanations on the declarations?
14. How is the declaration’s content verified?
15. How long is the declaration record maintained?
16. What is the punishment for not filing the declaration?
17. What is the penalty for making inaccurate statements on this declaration?
18. Can an official be prosecuted for violating this law?
19. Does the law / rule state that the public can access this information?
20. If the law / rule mentions public access to this information, does it also state how the public can access this information?

　　在此，如仿照前述所指政治獻金透明化之評估指標，而參考上開《世界銀行》所建構的指標並予修正後，則可以是：

　　（一）是否有無公職人員財產申報的法律規範存在？如「有」即表示至少有對公職人員的收入與支出之規範依據存在，並得由該國的權威當局加以監督，且得以將資訊予以公開揭露；反之，如「無」的話，即表示該國家的權威當局並無能力可以有效監督對公職人員的財產不當來源，從而即無公職人員財產申報的透明度可言。

　　（二）公職人員是否須依法公開揭露？如果「是」，則表示公職人員有義務向該國的權威當局申報，並將申報的結果讓公眾得以查詢週知；反之，有關公職人員財產申報須依法公開揭露的規範，尚屬「立法草案」之階段者，就表示其公職人員財產的透明度在這部分的程度並不高。

　　（三）公職人員財產申報者的適用範圍是否廣泛？如果「是」，則表示不僅在一定以上金額之門檻，公職人員必須申報其財產狀況，從而使公眾得以週知公職人員財產的擁有情形；反之，就表示其公職人員財產申報的透明度在這部分的透明化程度並不高。當然，此處所指適用法律而須申報的名單範圍愈廣者，則表示公職人員財產申報的透明度愈高；反之，則否。

　　（四）該國公民得否依法隨時查詢前述該國權威當局所持有或保管的公職人員財產申報的內容與紀錄？如果「可以」，就表示政治獻金透明化的程度更高；反之，則否。

 

--------20090309補載---------
至於，《自由之家(Freedom House)》在2008年所使用的指標，則是Checklist of Methodology Questions for 2008所揭示的23項評估指標[1]：
 

A. LEGAL ENVIRONMENT (0–30 POINTS)

1. Do the constitution or other basic laws contain provisions designed to protect freedom of the press and of expression, and are they enforced? (0–6 points)

2. Do the penal code, security laws, or any other laws restrict reporting, and are journalists punished under these laws? (0–6 points)

3. Are there penalties for libeling officials or the state, and are they enforced? (0–3 points)

4. Is the judiciary independent, and do courts judge cases concerning the media impartially? (0–3 points)

5. Is freedom of information legislation in place, and are journalists able to make use of it? (0–2 points)

6. Can individuals or business entities legally establish and operate private media outlets without undue interference? (0–4 points)

7. Are media regulatory bodies, such as a broadcasting authority or national press or communications council, able to operate freely and independently? (0–2 points)

8. Is there freedom to become a journalist and to practice journalism, and can professional groups freely support journalists’ rights and interests? (0–4 points)

 

B. POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT (0–40 POINTS)

1. To what extent are media outlets’ news and information content determined by the government or a particular partisan interest? (0–10 points)

2. Is access to official or unofficial sources generally controlled? (0–2 points)

3. Is there official censorship? (0–4 points)

4. Do journalists practice self-censorship? (0–4 points)

5. Is media coverage robust, and does it reflect a diversity of viewpoints? (0–4 points)

6. Are both local and foreign journalists able to cover the news freely? (0–6 points)

7. Are journalists or media outlets subject to extralegal intimidation or physical violence by state authorities or any other actor? (0–10 points)

 

C. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT (0–30 POINTS)

1. To what extent are media owned or controlled by the government, and does this influence their diversity of views? (0–6 points)

2. Is private media ownership transparent, thus allowing consumers to judge the impartiality of the news? (0–3 points)

3. Is private media ownership highly concentrated, and does it influence diversity of content? (0–3 points)

4. Are there restrictions on the means of journalistic production and distribution? (0–4 points)

5. Does the state place prohibitively high costs on the establishment and operation of media outlets? (0–4 points)

6. Do the state or other actors try to control the media through allocation of advertising or subsidies? (0–3 points)

7. Do journalists receive payment from private or public sources whose design is to influence their journalistic content? (0–3 points)

8. Does the economic situation in a country accentuate media dependency on the state, political parties, big business, or other influential political actors for funding? (0–4 points)
--------------------------------
[1] 請參閱http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=350&ana_page=348&year=2008，
 2009年3月9日查詢。