Constitutionality about Localization of Mainland China’s Enrollment: Conflict between University Autonomy and Claim of University Enrollment

碩士 === 國立成功大學 === 法律學系 === 105 === The localization of universities recruitment has been a hot issue in the Chinese mainland. This phenomenon has arisen two core constitutional problems. Firstly, does it violate the students’ basic rights of other provinces to protect the local enrollment indicators...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pin-LeiLi, 李品磊
Other Authors: Yue-Dian Hsu
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2017
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/xf39m7
Description
Summary:碩士 === 國立成功大學 === 法律學系 === 105 === The localization of universities recruitment has been a hot issue in the Chinese mainland. This phenomenon has arisen two core constitutional problems. Firstly, does it violate the students’ basic rights of other provinces to protect the local enrollment indicators which universities formulate? What is the basic right? Is it legal to formulate this different-treated recruitment policies? Secondly, Ministry of Education promulgates a series of rules and regulations to intervene the enrollment indicators every year. Does it violate the university autonomy so as to break the law? Though different data analysis to various universities, this phenomenon actually exists, which objectively violates the basic rights of candidates in another province. The rules promulgated by Ministry of Education affect university recruitment. In other words, it intervenes university autonomy. Via the analysis of rights of claim, the right of claim is based on the equal right, not the equal right and the educational right as the academic communities in Chinese mainland think. University autonomy, as a right of the constitution, is in fact magnified from the freedom scientific research, Article 47 of the constitution. The basic right of universities and students. Two conclusions can be reached. Firstly, universities’ enrollment policies are illegal no matter in the form or in fact. Secondly, although this action passes muster, it does not pass the law reservation principles. Therefore it is as illegal as the action of violating students’ equal rights.