大學自治與國家監督──國立臺灣大學校長遴選爭議之法理分析

University Autonomy and State Supervision: A Jurisprudential Analysis on the Controversies of NTU's Presidential Selection

二○一八年臺大校長遴選事件衍生若干學術議題。主要爭點包括：國立大學校長遴選是否為大學自治範疇？國立大學校長聘任權究竟歸屬何人？校長候選人與遴選委員間之利益迴避應依何種規範？校長當選人之違法疑義應如何解決？本文首先從整全觀點將大法官有關大學自治與國家監督的解釋，歸納出憲法規範架構，據此分析前述各項爭點。結果顯示，從現行規範架構可直接論證國立大學校長遴選應屬大學自治範疇；其次，校長實質選任權應歸國立大學所有，法律僅授權教育部藉聘任形式對校長遴選程序進行「事後監督」；再者，論者如採「規則論證」，則本案無迴避問題，惟教育部採「基準論證」從而認定本案有違行政正當程序；就校長當選人違法疑義言，司法途徑與臺大解聘途徑是正當解決管道。最後是研究發現與反思。

The event of National Taiwan University’s presidential selection in 2018 raises some academic concerns. Points at issue include: Is presidential selection of national universities protected by university autonomy? Who will be the powerholder to employ the presidents of national universities? What is the right norm offered to be applied for interest avoidance in the relationship between candidates of university president and presidential selection committeemen? What is the legal mechanism for resolving the controversies pertaining to a university president-elect and suspect? This article delves into above-mentioned issues based on a constitutional normative framework between university autonomy and state supervision, which is holistically inducted from serial Grand Justice Interpretations. Employing a jurisprudential analysis, a number of findings have emerged from this research. Firstly, presidential selection of national universities must be protected by university autonomy. This argument is justified on direct evidence from existing legal norms (i.e., the Constitution and University Act). Secondly, national universities have the substantive power to select their presidents in terms of university autonomy and the current mandate of the University Act. And the said Act only grants the Ministry of Education to proceed an ex-post supervision on university’s presidential selection via formal process of president-elect employment. Thirdly, there is no legal problem of interest avoidance controversy if the subject adopts a rule-based argumentation to illuminate the legal norms applied in NTU’s presidential selection case. The Ministry of Education, however, adopts a standard-based one, and concludes that the process of this case runs against the due process of law by making a flexible reading on the Administrative Process Law; Furthermore, it is claimed that the controversies caused by NTU’s president-elect and suspect will be legitimately resolved by normal judicial proceeding and NTU’s established mechanism for discharging an incumbent president. This article closes with several concluding remarks and reflective comments.