|Abstract: ||隨著時代進步，人民權利意識抬頭，社會爭議日趨多元，但司法資源有限，為有效消弭糾紛，如何疏減訟源已成政府重要課題，因此「替代式爭議處理機制」(Alternative Dispute Resolution，簡稱為ADR)也日益受到重視。調解委員會在處理爭議時，係求事理之平，調解委員得以其個人影響力，對於兩造勸之以理、動之以情，以情理的疏導來消弭雙方的落差，勸導兩造相互讓步，以促進鄉閭間和諧，具有提升行為規範之功能，並符合社會公平正義之要求。 「鄉鎮市調解條?」自民國44年施行迄今，透過地方仕紳擔任調解委員居中協調，成效卓越，以多元化及社會化的機制發揮一定的準司法效能。我國現行鄉鎮市調解制度於調解成立經法院核定後，與確定判決有同一之效力。申言之，擔任核心的調解委員肩負準裁判官之重任，其遴選資格實有必要予以法制化。然現行調解委員遴聘方式，僅依簡陋法規委由各由鄉、鎮、市長遴選鄉聘任之，故調解委員名額常淪為政治性酬庸職務。其人治化的提名作業，不但影響人民參與調解工作之權利，也削弱百姓對調解制度的信任，造成鄉鎮市調解制度之詬病。 本文考究相關文獻及法規，並參酌行政函示與司法實務判例後發現，鄉鎮市調解委員遴聘制度屬人民公法上之請求權，然現行制度卻簡陋立法，即授權地方行政首長人事同意權，得不經公開、公正遴選程序，卻可自行聘任屬意之調解委員，核實有5大遴選爭點分別為不確定法律概念、違反正當法律程序、干預方自治、違反平等原則之關係與缺乏司法救濟管道等。如此便宜行事的人治化做法，使得調解制度在地化的美意，掉入頻招惡評的政治酬庸泥沼中，實屬美中不足。 因此，在循調解專職化的世界潮流趨勢下，不但可以將調解業務從嚴謹的行政程序中解放，避免政府機關的預算約束，有效利用民間資源，且如能將調解視為一種專職業務，調解委員之選任，具有一定專職能力資格，不但可以提高調解委員素質，亦可強化人民信賴，達到紓減訟累的目標。|
While the rise of people's rights consciousness with the progress of the times, the increasingly controversial social disputes but the limited judicial resources. In order to effectively eliminate the dispute, how to reduce the lawsuit has become an important issue of government, so "Alternative Dispute Resolution " (ADR) is also increasingly valued. Mediation committee members deal with the disputes by its personal influence, they persuade the truth to eliminate the gap between the both sides. To promote the harmony in the township, with the function to enhance the function of norms, and in line with the requirements of social justic. Since the implementation of the Township Mediation Act, the local gentry has been coordinating and mediating, and has played a quasi-judicial effect in a diversified and socialized mechanism. China's current township mediation system in the mediation after the establishment of the court approved, and determine the same effect of the decision. As a matter of fact, as the core of the mediation committee shoulders the referee's responsibility, its selection of qualifications is necessary to be legalized. However, the current mediation committee recruiting methods, only by the simple laws and regulations by the township, town, mayor selection of rural appointment, so the members of the mediation is often reduced to political polite duties. The renegotiation of the people's operations, not only affect the people's participation in the mediation of the right, but also weaken the people's trust in the mediation system, resulting in the mediation of the township mediation system. This article examines the relevant documents and regulations, and takes into account the administrative letters and judicial practice cases found that the township government mediation committee of the recruitment system is the people's public law on the right to claim, but the current system is simple legislation, that is, authorized local executive head of personnel consent, Not to be openly and impartially selected, but to appoint their own mediation committee, to verify that there are five major selection points for the uncertainty of the legal concept, in violation of due process of law, the intervention of autonomy, the principle of violation of equality and the lack of judicial relief Pipes and so on. So cheap to do the practice of the rule of law, making the mediation system in the localization of good intentions, fell into the frequency of political criticism of the mud, is a fly in the ointment. Therefore, under the trend of mediating the world trend of full-time, not only can the mediation business from the rigorous administrative procedures in the liberation, to avoid the government budget constraints, the effective use of private resources, and if the mediation can be regarded as a full-time business, mediation Members of the election, with a certain degree of full-time qualifications, not only can improve the quality of mediation committee, but also strengthen the people's trust, to achieve the goal of mitigation.