憲法保障地方自治,自應本於自治之本旨,賦予地方自治團體人事高權。我國憲法雖有「地方制度」專章,並經數次修憲,惟現制仍較接近「中央政府與地方政府統合制」,即中央與地方政府之人事,大致上適用一統合的人事法令,並不存在寬廣的地方自治人事高權,法體系上也未若日本與德國等另制定地方公務員法或各邦公務員地位法。固然隨「省縣自治法」與「直轄市自治法」之制定,開啟省、市長直選;地方制度法之制定,亦使縣、市一級單位主管或首長之遷調權回歸縣、市長。惟相較於其他人員「由市長」或「由縣(市)長」任免,針對「主計、人事、警察、稅捐及政風之主管或首長」卻僅規定,「依專屬人事管理法律任免」。地方首長頂多具有監管權而無任免權,也因此衍生雙重隸屬與雙重指揮監督之體系與問題。我國憲政幾經民主化的重要歷程,實應與時俱進調整此專屬人事管理法制,俾地方「自治」不再留有缺憾。
Local self-government is guaranteed by Constitution, so personnel authority should entitled local self-governing body based on the meaning of self-autonomy. Although there is a chapter called "System of Local Government" in the Constitution and in Additional Amendment Articles of the Constitution, the current system is still closer to the “integrated and local service,” namely, both the central and local governments are principally ruled by integrated personnel laws and regulations, there is neither extensive personnel right of local self-government, nor local Civil Service Act in the law system as same as Japan and Germany. Even if the enactment of the “Province and County Self-government Act,” “Special Municipality Self-government Act,” and “Local Government Act” developed the elections of governor of the Province and the mayor of the special municipality, and the rights of personnel transfer of the heads of the level 1 agencies of the mayor/magistrate, the laws just prescribes "heads of the departments of budget, accounting and statistics; personnel; police; taxation; and government ethics, whom shall be appointed and dismissed in accordance with specific laws on personnel administration" compares with the other heads “shall be appointed and dismissed by the magistrate/mayor.” Because Magistrate/Mayor only has the right of supervision, but no right to appointment and dismissal, which results in a system and a problem of dual subordination and supervision.After several democratized processes in the constitutionalism, it’s times to adjust this specific laws on personnel administration to a real local "autonomy."