1999 年國民教育法增訂第8 條之2，空白授權教育部教科圖書審定之職權，對於審定之核心事項，隻字未提。相較於教科圖書審定委員會組織之部分規範，及其餘事項之概括授權，並無法推知立法者有意授權教育部訂定教科圖書審定之相關規範。由於教科圖書審定涉及人民言論、出版自由及學生國民教育基本權之限制，除須符合相關法令及法律原則外，其授權之依據亦須符合明確性原則。本文以文獻分析之方法，從相關法律原則及法令，檢驗及檢討教科圖書審定之授權母法與其子法，在母法及子法有違憲、違法之虞的情形下，教育部就教科圖書審定所為之行政處分，是否有效？ 亦為本文探究之重點。本文希能在前述分析中，提出相關法令規範之缺失及修正方向，供主政機關作為修法之參考。 本文最後依據研究結果，提出國民教育法第8 條之2、國民小學 及國民中學教科圖書審定辦法、國民小學及國民中學教科圖書審定委員會組織運作要點、課程綱要之相關修正建議供參。

The core prescription on textbook review and approval is not mentioned in the blank authority of the Ministry of Education in the revised Act 8-2 of Compulsory Education Law in 1999. To compare with the regulations and the other generalized authorization to the Committee for Review and Approval Textbooks, it is not able to infer the intention by the law makers to authorize the Ministry of Education to make related regulations to authorize and approve textbooks. Because of the review and approval of textbooks is involved in the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and basic rights of compulsory education, the review and approval of textbooks, apart from the related ordinance, needs to be conformed to the principle of explicitness. This article intends to examine and discuss whether the law and decree of textbook review and approval are in violation of the law and the constitution based on the principle of law by means of document analysis. In the meantime, this article intends to explore the legality of review and approval of textbooks under the administrative disciplinary action. In the meantime, this article tries to point out the defects in related regulations and to provide orientation for law revisions to the related organization for reference. Finally, this article provides the suggested revision of the Act 8-2 of Compulsory Education Law, the Regulations for Review and Approval of Elementary School Textbooks, the Organization and Operation of Committee for Review and Approval Textbooks, and the Guidelines of Curriculum based on the findings of this research for reference.