作者：朱芒
作者介绍：上海交通大学法学院教授，博士生导师
出版日期：2018年8月9日
内容提要 高校行政诉讼在通过法规范授权条款将高校的行为纳入了行政行为范围的同时,对相应校规也作了定位,形成了"介入性校规"和"自主性校规"两个类型。"田永案"等判决将两者并列相处,构筑了"二元规范结构论"司法审查判断方式。而以"武华玉案"为代表的判决,将后者作为裁量范围置于前者之内,建立起"一元规范结构论"司法审查判断方式。指导性案例则并存了这两种方式。判例的走向表现为由个案导致相关高校制度整体国家行政权化并提供了法律理由,司法审查也因此自我限缩了范围。这样的结果无疑与高校改革方向相向而行。对此,需要在诉讼程序规范之内重新构建法解释的出发点,寻找走出困境的制度性路径。
关键词 高校校规 高校诉讼 规范性文件 行政规定
Abstract: The administrative litigation of universities has incorporated the behaviors of universities into the scope of administrative act through legal norms and authorized clauses. In the meanwhile, university regulations are categorized into "intervening regulations" and "autonomous regulations". Tian Yong case and other judgments considered the two alternatives, thereby establishing the so-called bifurcated judicial review system. In comparison, Wu Huayu case as a milestone holds that autonomous regulations should be affiliated to intervening regulations, thus proposing the unified system. The subsequent guiding cases surprisingly established theoretical bases for both. The conflictive cases have strengthened the idea to treat university regulations closer to administrative power, thereby forcing the judiciary to self-restrain the scope of judicial review, which contradicts the direction of university reforms. Consequently, a possible solution is proposed to reconsider the starting point of legal interpretation within the context of the procedural law and find an institutional path to get out of the predicament.