| Temple Admission Fee
|
|---|
|
Park Public Corporation Demands Readjustment Of High Increase In Temple Admission Fee, Confrontation Imminent. Chogye Order To 'Expel Public Corporation Facilities From Temple Grounds', Encroach On Corporation's Monopoly. Active Measures To Be Taken By Chogye Order On June 18, the National Park Public Corporation(president, Kim Nam) decided to enforce a double admisision fee for entrance into both the temple and the park itself after the Temple Admission Fee Committee(chairman, Soljo Su Nim) decided to raise their admission fee. As a result, the public corporation has been the target of much public criticism. The National Park Public Corporation recently released official statements to each of the Park Management Offices stating that, "a double admission fee was inevitable as a joint admission fee greatly increased to accomodate the increase in the temple admission fee and without any consideration given to the price of commodities would have brought much public resentment toward the public corporation." In preparation for the double admission fee, the public corporation has already begun making plans on where to build the ticket booth, the handling of admission tickets etc. The public corporation suggested that an increase of 20% in the temple admission fee is fair and they have instructed their people to work in cooperation with the temples concerned. Meanwhile, the public corporation has been criticized for interfering with the Buddhist world's freedom to decide on the price of the admission fee. In response to the public corporation's decision to enforce a double admission fee, the head of general affairs of the Chogye Order has said that, "in the past 5 years, while the average rate of increase in the price of commodities and the park's admission fee has been 5.6% and 6.9% respectively, the average rate of increase in the temple's admission fee has only been 2.02%." He further stated that, "the public corporation's reasoning that their decision to establish a double admission fee was made only after hearing the details of the Temple Admission Fee Committee's decision, a decision that was based upon the constitutional laws of the Chogye Order, is complete nonsense." The head of general affairs promised "joint action by all members of the Chogye Order on any one of the temples currently under a joint admission fee agreement with their respective parks, in the event that they enforce a double admission fee rule." He also promised * the expulsion of all facilities belonging to the public corporation such as the ticket booth from temple-owned property. * no entrance onto temple-owned land without temple admission ticket. He also informed the temples under a joint admission fee agreement of the counteraction policies of the Chogye Order in the event that the Public Corporation Office refuses to do business with them. The head of general affairs claimed that, "temples charging an admission fee are just following the Cultural Artifacts Protection Laws and the late addition of a park admission fee by the public corporation is the cause of the double admission fee dispute." He is considering starting a movement whose purpose it would be to abolish the plans for a National Park admission fee. The temples currently under a joint admission fee agreement are: Wolchongsa Temple, Ssanggyesa Temple, Pusogsa Temple, Paegyangsa Temple, Hwaomsa Temple, Yongogsa Temple, Sinhungsa Temple, Pobjusa Temple, Haeinsa Temple, Kuryongsa Temple, Kabsa Temple, Tonghagsa Temple, Sinwonsa Temple, Taejonsa Temple, Huibangsa Temple, Paegryonsa Temple, Ch'onunsa Temple, Naesosa Temple, Naejangsa Temple, and Togabsa Temple. It has been reported that, of these temples, Pubjusa Temple and Kabsa Park Public Corporation have agreed to enforce a double admission fee rule. (Reported today, June 25) Although the Buddhist world and the public corporation show signs of radical opposition, both groups are taking pains to develop an alternative plan so as to avoid the inevitable burdens that go along with a dispute. Whether or not a double admission fee is enforced now remains to be seen. |