陳新民Chen, Shin-Min臺灣大學:國家發展研究所林淑真Lin, Shu-ChenShu-ChenLin2010-05-052018-06-282010-05-052018-06-282008U0001-2010200811435300http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/180244全球化已引領世界各國高等教育政策生態的改變，然而我國在處理高等教育議題或預算分配上，仍著重在國立大學部分，幾少從私立大學的角度出發，形成在高等教育階段公私失衡的情形，事實上我國的高等教育發展模式已經從「菁英式」走向「普及化」，而不管在學校數或學生數上私立大學已占約六成五以上，足見其在高等教育階段有極高之依存度，實應擔負更重大的教育責任與得到國家更多關注。 然而我國政府與私立學校間的互動關係卻常為人們所詬病，2008年私立學校法修正前之法制設計幾屬「財團法人制度」中被最嚴格監督的類型，使得私立學校直如教育部之下屬機關，而法制設計縱有許多防免機制，私校經營卻普遍仍是問題重重，足見法令規章與實際執行已產生嚴重落差。2008年1月16日私校法修正通過，原則上對各種監督予以鬆綁。 有鑑於憲政國家所保障的人權，須賴法律制度及憲法的人權理念相互配合才能妥當達成目的，人權是憲法學上的重要制度，必須予以縝密剖析，始得在日趨複雜的社會及實證法體系中，尋得其崇高地位。惟立法者在實際立法過程中基於社會發展、參與立法程序者的政治理念、黨團協商折衝或預算資源分配等因素考量，往往更甚於憲法價值秩序的考量，從而憲法的框架性很容易被忽略，以致行政實效原則與法治國家憲法秩序原則常有落差。關於憲法的權利保障得否在私立大學具體落實，國家的角色定位攸關重大，因此本論文從「憲法保障人民基本權」的視角來檢視國家對私立大學各項監督之正當性與合理性，並參考其他國家相關制度加以衡量。 首先在私人興學之憲法保障章中從教育憲法保障體系的觀點作整體意義之詮釋，將憲法保障人性尊嚴、人格發展自由、講學自由、受教育權及基本國策中對私人經營教育事業應予奬補助，均視為對私人興學的教育憲法保障體系之一環，使其適用有關基本權的理念加以保障與限制。在國家介入私人興學之自由權章中，確認私人興學有別於公立學校之辦學型態，具有獨立自主發展的特性，應得享有充分組織自主、人事自主與財政自主，以展現彈性與活力，達成其存立目的；國家除了保障該自由權的原始要求外，應更進一步保障其分享國家給付的要求，屬於國家權力部分則應謹守為達重要公益目的，且符合比例原則之手段，以確實維護與落實憲政主義之精神。在私立大學自治與國家權力分際及基本權衝突問題章中就私立大學之學術自由、大學自治與宗教自由等基本權與國家權力分際建立判準，此外對基本權衝突問題建立抽象的利益衡量，使基本權衝突的各方均能實現其最大基本權。在對私立大學各種監督措施之憲法秩序探討章中則就現制學校法人內部監督、財務監督、大學退場與合併監督及校務運作等各種監督措施之憲法性支持逐一探討，期能在合於憲法制度精神下辨明國家權力與私人興學的權利分際，作為未來改進我國法制之參考。The globalization has led countries demographic change of higher education policy in the world. But in terms of the issues of higher education or the distribution of the budget, our country is still focused on National Universities rather than private universities. As a result, there is the imbalance between public and private universities. As the matter of fact, Taiwan''s development model of higher education has been changed from "elite mode" to "universal mode" regardless of the number of university or students of private universities represents more than 65 percent of the total. Therefore, the responsibilities of private universities in the higher education system should deserve more concerns. However, the interaction between Taiwan''s government and private schools has often been criticized. Before the private school law to be amended in 2008, private schools under the "foundation system" have been most stringently supervised, which makes private schools as subordinate bodies of the Ministry of Education. Despite the law has its preventive mechanism, the operations of private schools in general are still serious problems. This evidences that there are serious gaps between the law and the practice. In January 16, 2008 the private school law was amendment and private schools are free from more supervisions in general. In light with the constitutional protection of human rights, we have to rely on the legal system and the concept of human rights in the Constitution in order to meet the objection. The human right is an important system in the constitution. We must carefully analyze it to maintain its subtle position under the increasingly complex social system and the empirical method. However, legislators in the legislative process regarding the social development, legislators’ political idea, negotiation of political parties and allocation of resources represent more importance over the constitution in various aspects. Thus, the framework of the Constitution is easily overlooked. As a result, the gap between the effectiveness of the administrative principles and the law principles often exists. As to how to formalize the constitutional protection over private universalities, the government plays an important role. Therefore, this paper has the intensive review of the justification and reasonableness over the constitutional protection of human basic rights in Taiwan as well as other countries. First of all, in the chapter of the Constitutional protections for private universities, it gives the interpretation as a whole from the view points of education and Constitution security system. It regards the Constitutional security for human dignity, the freedom of personality development, the freedom to teaching, the right to education and the award and grant to private education in the fundamental national policies as one role of the education Constitution’s security to guarantee and limit their concept that applicable to the basic rights. In the chapter of state intervention in the private schools, it confirmed that private schools are different from public schools in their types of operations. With the feature of independent development, the private school is entitled to have fully autonomy in the organization, personnel matters and finance in order to show flexibility and vitality for reaching its purpose. In addition to protect their original demands for the right to freedom, countries should also protect their demands for sharing the national payment. While the state power should keep the purpose of important public interests, and means in concur with the principle of proportionality in order to maintain and implement the spirit of constitutionalism. In the chapter of the border and basic rights conflict problem of private university autonomy and state power, it established the judgments between basic rights such as the private university''s academic freedom, university autonomy and the right to freedom of religion etc. Moreover, it established the abstract measurements of benefit for the problem of basic right conflict, which enables every aspects of basic rights conflict to implement their biggest basic rights. In the chapter of the constitutional order discussion about measure types of supervision on private universities, it discuss the constitutionality of the supervision on school’s internal affairs, finance, exit and merging, university operation and other measures of supervision in order to identify the rights border between state power and private schools under the spirit of the constitution and taking them as models for improving Taiwanese laws.口試委員會審定書 i辭 ii文摘要 iii文摘要 v一章 緒論 1一節　研究動機、研究目的與問題陳述 3一項　研究動機與問題意識 3二項　研究目的 6三項　問題陳述與研究範圍 7二節　文獻回顧 8三節　研究途徑與研究方法 9四節　研究架構與研究限制 10一項　研究架構與章節安排 10二項　研究限制 11二章 私人興學之憲法保障 13一節　私人興學與基本權 13一項　基本權地位與解釋原則 13二項　私人興學之源起及意涵 16二節　各國及我國相關憲法規範及實務見解 17一項　德國憲法規範與實務見解 17二項　日本憲法規範與實務見解 18三項　美國憲法規範與實務見解 18四項　我國憲法規範與實務見解 19三節　私人興學之權利主體、功能與保護法益 25一項　私人興學之權利主體 25二項　私人興學基本權功能與保護法益 26四節　國家介入私人興學自由權 28一項　國家介入之基礎 29二項　國家介入應具備之形式與實質合憲性要件 33三項　國家介入私人興學權利之合理界限 38五節　小結 41三章 私立大學自治權與國家權力及其他基本權衝突問題 43一節　私立大學之學術自由、大學自治與宗教自由權 43一項　學術自由於各國之憲法意義 43二項　大學自治於各國之憲法意義 48三項　宗教自由於各國之憲法意義 55二節　私立大學自治權與國家權力分際 59一項　國家對私立大學之適法性監督 60二項　私立大學自治權與國家權力分際之若干判準 61三節　私立大學自治權與其他基本權衝突 62一項　基本權衝突與利益衡量理論 62二項　私立大學自治與個別學術自由權或宗教自由權衝突問題 64四節　小結 72四章 我國對私立大學各種監督規定之憲法秩序探討 75一節　私立大學定位 75一項　財團法人地位與特性 75二項　私立大學法律性質之變遷 78三項　以其他組織型態設立私立大學之可行性 80二節　我國私立學校法制 82一項　法制之歷史沿革 82二項　私校法各時期重點與比較 83三節　與各國私校法制比較 89一項　日本法制比較 89二項　美國法制比較 95四節　對學校財團法人各種監督規定之憲法秩序探討 97一項　董事之選任核定 97二項　董事紛爭或違法之介入處理 104三項　監察人及公益監察人之設置 110四項　校長之選任核准 115五項　校產處置之核准 120六項　學費收取之核定 122七項　民間捐贈之稅制差別處理 129五節　對私立學校各種監督規定之憲法秩序探討 134一項　私立大學設立之核准 134二項　私立大學之合併機制 137三項　私立大學之退場機制 139四項　評鑑之實施 141五項　招生與系所調整 147五節　小結 150五章 結論及建議 155考文獻 167application/pdf1956933 bytesapplication/pdfen-US人權保障權力分立正當性正當法律程序立法裁量Human Rights ProtectionSeparation-of-powerLegitimacyDue process of lawLegislative Discretion[SDGs]SDG4[SDGs]SDG16thesishttp://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/180244/1/ntu-97-P95341007-1.pdf