校園性別事件處理法制化的意義是讓教師或學生等當事人的權益，都可以在 法律明文規範下獲得更明確的保障。然而，近年來隨著各級學校師對生「性騷擾」事件之申請調查和成案數攀升，被指控「性騷擾」之教師不服性平會調查報告之決議，一路申復及抗告至最高行政法院之案件也不在少數。顯示校園對師生「性騷擾」事件之處理仍存有相當大的檢討空間。為探究現行校園性別事件處理以及司法救濟過程，對性騷擾案中教師當事者之權益的影響，本文分析相關文獻和院判決書，對2023 年甫修正《性平法》之規範，以及行政法院對師生性騷擾爭議之審查密度與見解進行分析與討論，最後提出以下結論：（一）現行師生性騷擾的調查與處理程序，仍存有若干不利教師權益之因素；（二）最高行政法院對性平會調查報告之決定應採何種審查密度，見解分歧。本文建議：其一，未來可以設置專職單位，由專職、專人負責校園性別事件調查；其二，教育部可以將校園常見之性騷擾樣態予以類型化，逐年滾動式檢視與修正，讓教師可以預見且避免這些高風險行為；其三，行政法院對校園性騷擾爭議事件應採取一致的審查密度，以鞏固法治國權力分立與權利保障的精神。;This paper analyzes the current procedures for handling campus gender incidents and the judicial remedy process, along with its impact on the rights of teachers involved in sexual harassment cases. It examines the regulations outlined in the Gender Equity Education Act and the Supreme Administrative Court′s attitudes toward reviewing disputes related to teacher-to-student sexual harassment. Based on the analysis of relevant literature and court judgments, the paper concludes that the current investigation and handling procedures for teacher-to-student sexual harassment still have several factors that are unfavorable to the rights of teachers. Additionally, there are different opinions on the approach the Supreme Administrative Court should take in scrutinizing the decisions made in the gender equity education committee′s investigation reports. To address these issues, this paper proposes several recommendations. Firstly, it suggests establishing specialized units with dedicated personnel responsible for investigating campus gender incidents. Secondly, the Ministry of Education can categorize common patterns of sexual harassment on campuses and subject them to periodic review and adjustments, allowing teachers to anticipate and avoid these high-risk behaviors. Lastly, the administrative courts should adopt a consistent level of scrutiny for disputes related to campus sexual harassment incidents, thereby reinforcing the principles of the separation of powers and protection of rights in a rule-of-law state.
