V slovenskem ustavnem redu je univerza ustavna kategorija. Temelj za obstoj in delovanje univerz zagotavljajo določbe 57., 58. in 59. člena Ustave. Država je dolžna predvsem zagotavljati financiranje univerz in učinkovito uresničevanje svobode znanosti ter pravice do šolanja in izobraževanja. Četudi je država dolžna zagotavljati financiranje univerz, politika financiranja ne sme krniti avtonomije univerz. Hkrati spremembe financiranja ne smejo biti stvarno neutemeljene, niti sprejete brez predhodne in prepričljive analize vplivov in posledic za izvajanje študijskih programov in razvoj univerz. Tudi ne smejo ustvarjati stvarno neutemeljenih razlik med posameznimi univerzami. Ogroženost študijskih programov zaradi sprememb financiranja ali celo njihovo onemogočenje hkrati pomeni poseg v pravico študentov do šolanja in izobraževanja. Zdi se, da bi bil ustavno pravilen le sistem en bloc (angl. lump-sum; celostnega) financiranja univerz. Ne gre spregledati niti dejstva, da je univerzitetna sfera v Sloveniji prenormirana, s čimer je avtonomija univerz znatno okrnjena.
An autonomuos university is a unique environment of scientific exploration, critical discourse and intelectual development. Because of its autonomy the university has enjoyed great reputation and has been instrumental in defining the cultural, scientific, educational, social and political landscape.Today it seems that the fundations of university's autonomy are undermined. On the one hand, we see increased state interference with university's functioning. The state not only regulates funding, as is its constitutional obligation, but is also sistemically regulating university's organizational, research and human resources policies. Constitutionality of such regulatory policy is legitimately questioned.On the other hand, the autonomous status commits the university to act prudently, rationaly, unarbitrarily. Too often it seems that the university itself abuses its privileged status. Autonomy, of course, does not grant a bianco authorization for unconstitutional behaviour.The article deals primarily with the question of when and why state's funding policy, or its change, can constitute unconstitutional behaviour. The legal status of university as a public institute is also questioned.The Slovenian Constitution provides for autonomy of universities. Foremost this is a negative status right, allowing universities to decide freely on their organization and functioning. But it is also a positive status right, commiting the state to provide for universities basic organizational framework. State's primary constitutional obligation is to ensure universities’ formation as a legal entity. This obligation encompasses the duty to provide material conditions for the autonomous functioning of the university. The state is obliged not only to regulate what it must, but also what it can be reasonably expected of it. However, it seems that the status of universities as public institutions is unconstitutional, since it enables the state to directly influence their organization and functioning. The state may and must regulate university's functioning only insofar as it is necessary to protect basic constitutional principles, rights and the public interest.The Constitution provides that the manner of university's funding shall be regulated by statute. However, it also states that the manner in which human rights are exercised may be regulated by a statute where this is necessary due to the particular nature of an individual right. A strict and accurate control of state's funding policy must therefore be implemented. Even more so when funding is regulated by substatutory regulations. If these regulations determine rights and obligations anew, they may be regarded as unconstitutional. Also, if the state adopts such a policy of funding that without convincing and well-founded reasons discriminates one (or some) universities in comparison to others, such action may be considered as unconstitutional as well.The Constitutional provision establishing universities autonomy is perhaps the most unambiguous of them all. It clearly demands that the university be autonomous. Any statutory regulation of universities funding must be conducted within constitutionally permissible boundaries. Substatutory regulations may not limit or reduce constitutionally or statutory guaranteed rights nor may they expand or aggravate responsibilities. Constitutionally, it seems that 'lump-sum' funding would be most appropriate. Complete freedom of internal alocation of funds seems to be the cornerstone of universities autonomy.The basic premise for determining the relationship between the state and the university must be the realisation that it is an objective task of the state to provide for freedom of scientific endeavour. However, it is also clear that the constitution forbids for the question of university's autonomy to become one of positive law.The Constitutional Court has so far formulated additional and important principles of state's responsibility for financing of the universities. The Courts decision in U-I-68/98 stipulates that the state is required to prevent the endangerment of public schooling programs because of lack of funds. It must not itself create such a danger by changing the policy or the scope of public schooling funding. The state is also required to provide public funds in accordance with the principles of equality and nondiscrimination. Considering specific circumstances under which different universities function, it would also be unconstitutional if state's policy, without well-founded and convincing reasons, indirectly discriminated one or some of them. Such action may consequently infringe the constitutional right of education and schooling. Although the state is compelled to establish a single system of higher education, this may not be done in a way that improves or impairs the status of one or more universities. If the manner of university's state funding is suddenly, sistemically inadequately and uncompellingly altered to the extent that it signicifantly hardens or even disables its existence, such action may constitute an unfounded intervention into legitimate expectations of universities with regards to conservation and development of specific programs.The article also examines Constitutional Courts decision in which the Court, in assessing the state's obligation of funding the public radiotelevison company, created criteria that is indirectly applicable to the issue of university's autonomy, its right of public funding, freedom of scientific and artistic endeavour and the right of schooling. Statutory principles and criteria as determined by the legislator regarding the state's role in financing the public radiotelevision company, are even more valid when it comes to the state's role in financing universities. The state is obliged to provide for legal independence of the university and to enable it to freely and effectively exercise its social role and tasks.
