You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

March 31, 2026

Autonomy with Accountability: Key Changes under Vietnam’s New Higher Education Law

Subscribe to Updates

Against the backdrop of Vietnam’s rapid economic and technological transformation and its ambition to build a knowledge-driven economy, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted Law on Higher Education No. 125/2025/QH15 on December 10, 2025, The new law took effect on January 1, 2026, replacing Law on Higher Education No. 08/2012/QH13 of 2012 and its subsequent amendments after more than a decade of implementation.

The new law reflects a significant policy shift toward enhancing the institutional autonomy of higher education institutions (“HEIs”)—universities and other university-level institutions. By granting broader autonomy, Vietnam aims to enable HEIs to operate more proactively, better respond to market needs, and improve the quality and efficiency of education and research activities.

Comprehensive Institutional Autonomy in HEIs

The new law marks a significant shift by granting HEIs comprehensive autonomy as a statutory right, within the bounds of the licensed scope of educational operation and the legal framework, rather than a conditional right as provided under the former law. Under the new law, HEIs are empowered to exercise autonomy over their academic expertise, training, scientific research, international cooperation, organizational structure, personnel, finance, and other higher education activities. The expansion of institutional autonomy is also accompanied by a correspondingly strengthened framework of institutional accountability.

However, Vietnam maintains a certain degree of control and imposes restrictions on institutional autonomy in sensitive and strategically important areas. These controls and restrictions include limitations on training autonomy in the majors of teacher training, national defense, and security; and restrictions on financial and personnel management autonomy for HEIs under the administration of the Ministry of National Defense and the Ministry of Public Security.

New Model for Curriculum Development

The new law removes the concept of “opening a training major” and focuses regulation on how training programs are developed and delivered. Under the previous regime, an HEI wishing to offer a new program would need to go through a procedure to open that major itself or apply for approval to open that major if the HEI did not have full institution autonomy—a process that was often administratively burdensome.

Under the new law, the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) will issue a comprehensive list of training majors, from which HEIs must identify and register the majors they intend to offer as part of the licensing process for their educational operation permit.

At the same time, HEIs are granted autonomy to develop their programs within the registered training majors in compliance with the training program standards to be issued by MOET. In general, the principal/rector is authorized to approve the training programs of the HEI. However, certain specialized programs remain subject to approval by the competent state authority, including teacher education and health-related fields, and law-related fields.

To ensure continuity and stability during the transition, the new law establishes transitional arrangements for HEIs that either submitted applications for, or were approved to, open training majors before January 1, 2026. Specifically:

  • Valid applications submitted before January 1, 2026, will continue to be processed under the regulations that were effective at the time of submission.
  • HEIs may implement, within three years, approvals for opening of training majors issued before January 1, 2026, in compliance with the corresponding standards issued before that date.

Stakeholders should monitor forthcoming guidance from MOET regarding the consequences of failing to meet the three-year transitional deadline.

Abolition of University Councils in Public HEIs

The new law fundamentally alters institutional governance, by abolishing university councils in the governance structure of public HEIs, pursuant to the orientation of Resolution No. 71-NQ/TW dated August 22, 2025, of the Central Committee.

However, two categories of HEIs are exempt from this change. First, an HEI established pursuant to an international treaty between the Vietnamese government and a foreign government may continue to maintain the university council within its governance structure as provided under such international treaty. Second, university councils remain in place in private HEIs, where they continue to function as the governing body representing stakeholders, making decisions on development orientation, organizational structure, resource utilization, and accountability.

Foreign Branch Campuses Under Tighter Regulatory Alignment

The new law also reshapes the legal landscape for foreign branch campuses (“FBCs”) of foreign HEIs in Vietnam, moving toward governing FBCs under a legal framework that closely aligns with the regime applicable to a foreign‑invested private HEI. In particular, FBCs must now comply with the regulations applicable to foreign-invested private HEIs not only with respect to establishment and operation, as inherited from previous regulations, but also with respect to the organizational structure, as newly required under the new law.

Such changes establish a comprehensive legal framework governing FBCs in Vietnam, but also raise practical challenges in reconciling the structural and in-nature differences between FBCs and foreign-invested private HEIs, as well as navigating conflicts between Vietnamese law and the regulations of the parent university’s home jurisdiction. These challenges may persist unless the forthcoming detailed guidelines of the government provide special regulatory regimes to facilitate the adaptation of FBCs.

Classification of Training Locations

The new law introduces a formal legal definition of “training locations” for HEIs for the first time. Similar to the approach in the Law on Vocational Education passed on the same day, these include (i) headquarters, (ii) branch campuses, and (iii) the newly recognized “other training locations,” defined as places where all or part of a training program is delivered, under the management of HEIs, and in compliance with prescribed quality‑assurance conditions. “Other training locations” do not perform governance and management functions, and include premises owned by or lawfully used by the HEI, venues for joint training programs, and sites for practical training.

This change allows institutions to share facilities, such as sports fields, laboratories, and clinical training sites, and deliver training programs in a more flexible and effective manner, while maintaining compliance with prescribed quality‑assurance conditions.

Outlook

The new Law on Higher Education marks a significant shift in regulations toward modernizing Vietnam’s higher education system, bringing it closer to international standards, encouraging innovation, and promoting the sector’s sustainable development. The new framework also opens clearer and more transparent avenues for investment by introducing greater institutional autonomy and streamlining administrative procedures, reducing long‑standing regulatory bottlenecks, among other changes. At the same time, it imposes stricter quality assurance and compliance requirements. These heightened standards increase competitive pressure across the sector. Therefore, long‑term strategic planning as well as monitoring the upcoming detailed implementation guidelines from the government is essential for both existing and prospective investors.

Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 14, 2026
Employers operating in Thailand can enforce post-employment noncompete covenants, but success depends on precise drafting and strong evidentiary support. Thai courts will uphold restraints that protect legitimate employer interests and are fair and reasonable in duration, geographic reach, and substantive scope. Overbroad covenants, however, draw judicial skepticism and may fail unless they are drafted in severable, defensible components tied to the employee’s actual role. This article synthesizes recent trends in Thai case practice, explains how Thai courts assess reasonableness in employment restraints, and provides a practical litigation-focused framework for drafting enforceable covenants, preparing evidence, and pursuing relief through the Labor Court. The Legal Framework and Its Practical Implications Thai courts evaluate noncompete covenants under general principles of contract enforceability and public policy, with particular focus on whether a restraint is necessary to protect a legitimate employer interest and proportionate to that objective. In employment matters, this analysis is shaped by the employee-protective tenor of Thai labor law and by the Labor Court’s equitable discretion in determining appropriate remedies. The practical takeaway is that standardized or broadly drafted covenants rarely survive scrutiny. Courts look for a demonstrable nexus between the employee’s actual exposure to confidential information, trade secrets, or customer relationships and the scope of the restraint. Where that nexus is weak or the restraint operates as a blanket prohibition, courts are inclined to decline enforcement or limit relief to a narrowly tailored prohibition. The employer interests most commonly recognized as legitimate in Thai practice include the protection of trade secrets, confidential business information, and goodwill tied to identifiable customer segments or territories. Courts are more likely to enforce restraints where employers can clearly document what information is at risk, why particular customer relationships matter, and how the employee was involved with those assets. Judges also look closely at the
Read More
January 6, 2026
Thailand is developing new legislation on responsible business conduct that would impose statutory obligations on large enterprises to manage human rights and environmental risks throughout their operations and supply chains. The Draft Act on the Promotion of Responsible Business Conduct, commonly referred to as the Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence (HRDD) Bill, has been developed through extensive consultation involving a wide range of stakeholders, with the Ministry of Justice playing a leading role. If enacted, the HRDD bill would reshape how certain large businesses operate and manage their supply chains, reflecting a recognition of international standards and global concerns regarding human rights and environmental protection. By introducing legally binding due diligence obligations, the draft aims to ensure that businesses operating in Thailand are held accountable for adverse impacts throughout their operations and supply chains, in line with emerging global legal frameworks. Who Will Have to Comply? The HRDD bill primarily targets large enterprises based on their annual revenue thresholds: Manufacturing businesses with annual revenue exceeding THB 500 million Wholesale, retail, or service businesses with annual revenue exceeding THB 300 million The draft would also cover state-owned enterprises and foreign businesses operating in Thailand if their operations meet the applicable revenue thresholds. What Does Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence Involve? Under the HRDD bill, due diligence is not a one-time checklist but an ongoing process with several key requirements: Adopt and publicly disclose a sustainability policy. Businesses must commit publicly to respecting human rights and protecting the environment, and must integrate this policy into corporate governance and risk management systems. Identify and assess risks. Companies must identify and assess risks of human rights violations and environmental harm across their operations and value chains. Prevent or reduce risks. Businesses must implement effective and proportionate measures to prevent or mitigate
Read More
December 30, 2025
On December 17, 2025, Laos’ Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MOIC) issued a notice introducing a new digital system that allows e-commerce businesses to obtain required certificates and licenses through an online, application-based platform. Notice No. 3988, which will take effect on February 1, 2026, introduces the E-Trust platform, a downloadable application that allows e-commerce businesses to remotely obtain acknowledgement certificates and business operating licenses. New Digital Registration Options Under the previous framework established by the Decree on E-commerce (2021), businesses were required to complete registration exclusively through paper-based submissions. The new system now offers businesses two registration options: Traditional paper-based process at the Division of E-commerce Management within the MOIC; or Electronic registration and renewal through the E-Trust platform. This change is expected to streamline procedures, reduce administrative burdens, and enhance accessibility for businesses operating outside Vientiane. The E-Trust platform facilitates compliance for both individuals and legal entities required to submit applications and renewals for required certificates and licenses. The development is particularly beneficial for businesses located in remote provinces, as it eliminates the need for physical travel and significantly accelerates processing times. Compliance Requirements and Penalties Businesses must obtain or renew the required certificates and licenses to avoid sanctions under the Decision on Fines and Other Measures for Violation of the Decree and Regulations on E-commerce (No. 2828/MOIC, dated November 11, 2025). Penalties for noncompliance may include monetary fines and other enforcement measures.
Read More
December 19, 2025
Prior to the dissolution of the House of Representatives, Thailand’s cabinet approved a draft amendment to the Administrative Procedure Act, following review by the Council of State. If enacted, this reform will fundamentally change how state agencies process business applications and appeals by imposing enforceable timelines and legal consequences for inaction. The draft directly targets a longstanding commercial frustration: applications and appeals that vanish into administrative silence, stalling investment and foreclosing judicial review across sectors ranging from real estate and manufacturing to healthcare and finance. The “Silence Means Yes” Rule for Applications At the core of the reform is a new automatic “approval by implication” for applications subject to statutory processing deadlines. If an official fails to notify an applicant of a decision within the legally prescribed period, the application will be deemed approved as a matter of law. This presumption shifts the costs of delay from businesses to the bureaucracy and gives applicants a definitive legal position once time expires. The mechanism applies to routine licensing and registration matters governed by explicit consideration periods in existing statutes or ministerial regulations. Officials may extend the decision period by up to thirty days, but only if they notify the applicant before the original deadline and substantiate that the delay arises from genuinely exceptional circumstances beyond their control. Certain sensitive applications are expressly excluded from automatic approval, including those that may significantly affect national security or defense, public safety and health, the environment or natural resources, or national cultural heritage. Once the deadline passes without a decision, businesses can proceed with deployment of capital and operations—construction, hiring, procurement, and market entry—without waiting for formal permission that may never arrive. For time-sensitive projects, this materially reduces regulatory timing risk. The “Deemed Rejection” Rule for Appeals The draft introduces a parallel “deemed rejection”
Read More