Grant Rules

Approved by the Judicial Reform Foundation Standing Executive Committee on January 4, 2021
Amended by the Judicial Reform Foundation Standing Executive Committee on December 6, 2021

Article 1

The Judicial Reform Foundation (the "Foundation") adopts these Rules to promote judicial reform, strengthen policy-oriented research, and cultivate researchers.

Article 2

The categories of eligible work and grant amounts are as follows:
To encourage research and ensure fairness in review, the program accepts applications only for theses, dissertations, or independent papers that have not yet been completed.

1. Doctoral dissertations: NT$80,000 in total. NT$30,000 is awarded after successful completion of the first-stage research-proposal review, and NT$50,000 after successful completion of the second-stage review of the completed dissertation.
2. Master's theses: NT$50,000 in total. NT$20,000 is awarded after successful completion of the first-stage research-proposal review, and NT$30,000 after successful completion of the second-stage review of the completed thesis.
3. Independent papers: NT$30,000-80,000 in total. NT$10,000-30,000 is awarded after successful completion of the first-stage research-proposal review, and NT$20,000-70,000 after successful completion of the second-stage review of the completed paper. Independent papers must contain at least 20,000 Chinese characters/words as required by the program; the Thesis Review Committee determines the grant amount case by case based on the proposal and completed paper.

Article 3

Funded work must address a judicial-reform topic. Relevant academic fields include, without limitation, law, political science, sociology, forensic science, rule-of-law education, and international human-rights law. Each year the Foundation will announce priority grant topics for applicants' reference.

Article 4

The Foundation shall establish a Thesis Review Committee composed of four scholars, two members of the Rule-of-Law Education Working Group, and one NGO worker. Candidates shall be recommended by the working group and appointed after approval by the Standing Executive Committee. Members serve three-year terms and may be reappointed once.

Article 5

The Thesis Review Committee shall:

1. Prepare the annual grant budget, program, and priority topics and submit them to the Standing Executive Committee for approval.
2. Determine the number of grants and the amount of each grant.
3. Review first-stage research proposals and conduct oral reviews to select recipients.
4. Select external reviewers for second-stage review and determine review fees.
5. Review second-stage submissions and determine successful applicants.
6. Determine forms of recognition and activities in addition to grant payments.
7. Handle other matters relating to the grant program.

Article 6

The Foundation shall announce each year's grant program before Judicial Day on January 11. Applicants must complete the application form and submit a research proposal, a recommendation letter from an academic advisor or other scholar/expert, and any other required materials between June 1 and July 31.

Article 7

After receiving an application, the Secretariat shall first review whether the submission complies with the formal requirements of the annual program. Applicants will be notified periodically of missing materials and must cure deficiencies within the specified period; late supplements will not be accepted. After the application period closes, the submissions shall be forwarded to the Thesis Review Committee for first-stage review.

Article 8

First-stage review consists of an initial written review followed by an oral review. Successful applicants shall be announced and the first-stage grant paid by October 1 each year.
A first-stage review meeting may convene only if at least half of all committee members are present. A resolution requires approval by at least half of the members present.
At the initial written-review stage, the Committee reviews the application materials, determines the number of grants available that year, and selects candidates for oral review up to the applicable quota.

At the oral-review stage, the Committee conducts interviews and selects applicants who pass the first-stage proposal review. For independent papers, it also determines the grant amount and deadline for submitting the completed paper. Criteria for both stages are:

1. Value of the research topic.
2. Soundness of the research methodology.
3. Feasibility of the research methodology.

Article 9

Applicants who pass first-stage review must submit the completed work within the following periods:

1. Doctoral dissertation: three years.
2. Master's thesis: two years.
3. Independent paper: one to three years, as determined case by case by the Thesis Review Committee based on the schedule in the research proposal.

The submission period runs from October 1 of the year in which the applicant passes first-stage review. An applicant who fails to submit the completed work before the deadline loses eligibility for second-stage review.

An applicant may request one extension in writing with reasons. The extension may not exceed one year.

Article 10

Second-stage review consists of external peer review followed by final review. Successful applicants shall be announced and the second-stage grant paid by January 11 each year.

After receiving the completed work from an applicant who passed first-stage review, the Foundation shall appoint two external reviewers with appropriate expertise to conduct double-blind review. The Thesis Review Committee determines the reviewers and their fees.

External review should ordinarily be completed within one month. Review outcomes are:

1. Doctoral dissertation: (1) Recommend; (2) Do not recommend.
2. Master's thesis: (1) Recommend; (2) Do not recommend.
3. Independent paper: (1) Recommend; (2) Recommend after revision; (3) Re-review after revision; (4) Do not recommend.

If either external reviewer recommends rejection, the applicant fails second-stage review. If a reviewer recommends acceptance after revision or re-review after revision, the applicant must complete revisions within 30 days. A paper designated for re-review shall be returned to the original reviewer, ordinarily for a two-week re-review, with only two possible outcomes: recommend or do not recommend.

For final review, an applicant recommended by both external reviewers is reviewed by the Thesis Review Committee for compliance with the annual program. A final-review meeting requires at least half of all members to attend. The applicant passes unless at least two thirds of the members present vote against approval. For an independent paper that passes second-stage review, the grant amount is determined by approval of at least half of the members present.

Article 11

A committee member shall recuse from discussion and voting on an applicant if the applicant is the member's spouse, a blood relative or relative by marriage within the third degree, or if the member is the applicant's advisor, oral-examination committee member, recommender, or otherwise has circumstances that may affect impartial review. Failure to recuse when required disqualifies the applicant and requires repayment of all grant funds received.

Article 12

A recipient may not seek an award, grant, or subsidy from another government agency or civil-society organization for the same work. Violation of this prohibition on duplicate funding disqualifies the applicant and requires repayment of all grant funds received.

Article 13

Applicants must ensure that their work does not involve plagiarism, unauthorized adaptation, infringement, or another violation of academic ethics or copyright law. A violation disqualifies the applicant and requires repayment of all grant funds received.

Article 14

When a funded work is formally published, its first page shall state: "This work was supported by a grant from the Judicial Reform Foundation, for which the author gratefully acknowledges the Foundation."
Recipients shall grant the Foundation, royalty free and without territorial, temporal, or media restrictions, the right to publicly display, exhibit, and transmit the full text of the funded work.

Article 15

The Foundation may recognize recipients through public awards, research presentations, or other activities and may promote funded work by subsidizing printing, publishing books or special issues, or other means. The Thesis Review Committee determines the form of recognition and promotion.

Article 16

These Rules take effect upon approval by the Standing Executive Committee. Amendments shall be adopted in the same manner.