國立大學法人規劃及未來監督機制之研究

Abstract

行政機關「行政法人化」主要屬分權化的議題，是將特定機關或機構獨立出去，賦予其與國家法人有別的法律人格，以分擔國家任務之履行，不但保留私法型態之人事及預算靈活性，也兼具公法組織型態之公共性及行政監督可能性，核心是希望對於原本公務機關的「人事」、「會計」制度有一定程度的鬆綁，以求增進效率。但國立大學法人與一般行政機關法人有差異性，因為國立大學必須保障其核心價值—學術自由與大學自主。 雖然行政法人法草案（2005.8.8行政院版）尚未通過，大學法（2005.12.28）中國立大學法人化相關條文也暫被排除，但「國立大學法人」是教育部的政策大方向，本文就「國立大學法人監督機制」這個論文題目進行探討，將監督機制分為外部監督（本文第五章）與內部監督（本文第六章），分別深入探討、分析，而外部監督（限縮在監督機關監督）主要來自教育部、高等教育評鑑中心、高等教育審議委員會；內部監督則是透過大學內部的權力分立，包括校長、董事會、校務會議。本文嘗試做一政策預評估，並提出建議意見，以提供未來國立大學法人化後，監督機制運作的規範建議，而在設計監督機制方面可適度考量「公司治理」理論，以使監督機制能有較完善的規劃。The main issue regarding making executive agencies “administrative corporations” is decentralization, which detaches certain agencies/organizations from state authorities and empowers each with legal personality. Such arrangement does not only reserve the flexibility of human resources and budget in private corporations, but also benefits from the publicity and administrative supervision of public corporations. Compared to public agencies, this eclectic modification brings more efficiency because it is more flexible in aspects of human resources and accounting. However, the essential difference between national universities and common administrative corporations should not be neglected. Academic freedom and university autonomy, two important objectives of national universities, should be guaranteed through the process of being “corporations.” Although so far Administrative Corporation Bill (2005.8.8，the official version of Executive Yuan) has not been adopted yet and the relative stipulations in University Law（2005.12.28）are also temporarily excluded, the national university corporation is still a promising policy for Department of Education to follow in the near future. In this essay, I would like to make a discussion on this issue, focusing on supervision mechanisms for national university corporations. In my analysis, the mechanism will be categorized as the outer supervision and the inner supervision. The former refers to the supervision mainly from Department of Education, Center for Evaluation of Higher Education and Committee of Higher Education, while the latter is from the university’s president, Board of Trustees of Higher Education and University Councils (through the decentralized authorities which are inner the university). With theories of “corporation governance” and “new public management,” I attempt to make an evaluation of this education policy and further propose strategies that might illustrate a more practical and useful project of supervision mechanisms for national university corporations.