大學自治與行政監督之界限-以國立大學為中心

The Boundary between University Autonomy and Administrative Supervision- Focused on National Universities

翁瑄禮(Shuan-Lee Weng)

指導教授 ： 林明鏘

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2017年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201701063

摘要

本文由大學自治最主要之財務、組織、人事與教學研究的四個自治面向出發，運用法制與文獻分析、比較法討論、實務案例研究的方法，討論大學自治與行政監督兩者的緊張與平衡關係，提出大學自治在台灣社會所遭遇之實際案例與困境，輔以法規範違憲審查，提出本文認為在財務、組織、人事與教學研究四個方面教育主管機關較為妥適的監督程度與監督方式。
在大學法律地位的問題上，本文認為，應將國立大學法律地位定性具有權利能力的「自治團體」。在現有「大學法」的制度框架下，以比較務實的做法，檢討我國教育相關法令，討論如何減低教育主管機關的行政干預、推展與落實大學自治。
在國立大學財務管制的部分，教育主管機關目前監督模式過於緊縮，雖有校務基金設置條例的實施，卻沒有真正財務彈性之實。因此首先應確立校務基金設置條例做為大專校院財務事項特別法的地位，排除其他相關法令的適用，財務事項統一由校務基金條例及各校收支管理辦法來辦理。而就校務基金條例的內容修正方面，應解除校務基金投資項目之限制規定、對學費管制適度鬆綁、鼓勵大專校院收費服務拓展，同時延續國家對於國立大學的補助義務，使國立大學財務可以建立真正的自主性。財務監督機制的部分，對於來自公部門的補助收入，分別建立內控與外控機制。外控機制的部分，由教育部定期查核、以及在網路上公告周知大學財務報表的方式來監督。內控機制同私部門捐贈之財務，建立由各大學校院系所、教師個人或研究團隊名下之研究帳戶，並藉由各院(系)所組成之「委員會」，進行監督管理等防弊機制程序。
大學的組織自治區分為外部和內部自治兩種：外部組織自治為國立大學的合併與私立大學的退場制度；內部自治則是行政單位與教學研究單位設置、調整的自治。在國立大學整併部分，教育主管機關強制執行的方式並不適宜。內部組織方面，部分現行法規範有違反法律保留原則和大學自治精神的疑慮；教育主管機關亦也可能因為以政策考量為依歸而損及組織自治。
在人事自治方面，大學法及其相關法規就教師聘用已賦予大學足夠聘用自治空間；但在行政人員聘用之領域，仍有值得檢討之處。在教師兼職問題的案例中，本文認為，教育部《公立各級學校專任教師兼職處理原則》不當干預大學人事管理自主，應回歸由各大學在聘約中自行訂定即可。最後，對於大學停聘、解聘、不續聘教師的決定，應刪除教評會決議後仍須交由教育部最終核准的規範，使大學的人事異動的自主可以獲得適當保障。
最後，在教學自治的核心領域，對於教學內容之決定，現行大學法制給予大學校院及教師足夠之自主權；惟在教學方式的領域，研究生助理的整體教學制度，仍有可以檢討之處。

關鍵字

大學自治 ； 行政監督 ； 大學法 ； 核定 ； 備查 ； 財務自治 ； 組織自治 ； 人事自治 ； 教學自治

並列摘要

There are four important aspects about university autonomy, including finance, organization, personnel and teaching-research autonomy. This paper discusses the boundary between university autonomy and administrative supervision by using literature and literature analysis, comparative discussion and practical case study. Recently, there were several representative cases happened in Taiwan that dealt the dilemma between university autonomy and administrative supervision by the authorities. In this thesis, I first explain the regulations about universities operation in force, and point out the struggles the universities are facing today. Last, I will suggest the proper boundary between university autonomy and administrative supervision.
About the legal status of national universities, this paper argues that national universities should be qualitative as "self-governing body."
The present financial control of national universities by the authority is too tight. Although there is National University Endowment Fund Establishment Act 2015 in force, universities in Taiwan do not have real financial autonomy and flexibility. Therefore, we should consider National University Endowment Fund Establishment Act 2015 as special law to college financial affairs, excluding the application of other relevant laws and regulations. Several amendments should also be made to National University Endowment Fund Establishment Act 2015. As for anti-fraud mechanism, universities should turn in financial statements to the Ministry of Education on a regular basis and upload these statements on the Internet to the public. National universities should also establish financial committee of colleges, departments and grad-schools. By the permission of these committees, each research account can legally expend money.
There are external and internal autonomy of university organizational autonomy. External autonomy deals the existence of a school and internal autonomy decides the component of a school. This thesis advocates that the educational authorities shouldn’t interfere the decision of merger and closing of universities. For internal organization autonomy, some of the existing laws and regulations have violation against the principle of legal retention and university autonomy.
In the area of personnel autonomy, the University Act 2015 and its related laws have given the University sufficient employment in respect of the employment of teachers. However, there is still room for review in the areas of administrative staff employment. In the case of teacher- pluralism, "the principle of part-time management of full-time teachers at all levels of public schools" improperly intervenes in the management of university personnel. Last, if a national university decide to suspend, dismiss or deny to renewed employment with its teachers, no previous approval should be made by the Ministry of Education.
Finally, in the field of teaching contents, the current regulations have given enough autonomy to both universities and professors. However, for the system of postgraduate assistant –which is considered as a teaching method, there are still some adjustments to be made.

並列關鍵字

university autonomy ； administrative supervision ； University Act ； approval ； review ； financial autonomy ； organizational autonomy ； personnel autonomy ； teaching autonomy

參考文獻

1.Deane Neubauer，蔡小婷譯(2009)。〈美國高等教育認可的流變〉，《評鑑雙月刊》，第14期，頁31-35。

2.Hans-Heinrich Trute(2012)，〈行政法學中的治理概念——以大學為例〉，《國立中正大學法學集刊》，頁241-260。

4.朱家賢(2008)。〈產學合作！高等教育的新契／棄機〉，《學校行政》，54 期，頁1-11。

5.池俊吉(2012)。〈美國高等教育認可組織之認可制度：發展與挑戰〉，《評鑑雙月刊》，第35期，頁36 -42。

14.李建良(2000)，〈公立大學公法人化之問題探析〉，《國立臺灣大學法學論叢》，29卷4期，頁14-44。