公法抑或私法:高等教育认证的法律规制--基于德国与美国的比较法考察

Public or Private Law:Legal Regulation of Higher Education Accreditation--A Comparative Law Study Based on Germany and the United States

作为高等教育质量保障的重要形式,高等教育认证的法律规制,已经成为以德国和美国为代表的两大法系高等教育法律研究与实务的前沿议题。在德国,高等教育认证被纳入公法规制的框架与体系之中。作为基本权利的干预方式,高等教育认证是否对学术自由基本权利构成侵害,是否违反法律保留原则与比例原则等法治国的基本原则,构成德国高等教育认证合宪性与合法性审查的焦点议题。在美国,认证机构具有私人协会的法律地位。长期以来,法院以适度限制的眼光对待认证机构。然而,随着作用于联邦政府、认证机构和高等教育机构之间关系的法律的动态演变,适用于认证机构的"私标签"正变得越来越过时,认证机构作为"政府行为者"这一新兴概念引起了宪法方面的讨论。尽管,德国与美国高等教育认证的法律规制,存在着截然不同的逻辑起点和传统。但是,二者均旨在促进学术自由与公共利益的整合,也都强调对高等教育认证中所特有的公权力进行限制。对于中国而言,以专业认证为代表的高等教育认证具有鲜明的"公行政"色彩。应通过高等教育认证的公法规制,倒逼高等教育认证体系的变革与调适,是中国高等教育质量保障走向法治化的必然要求。

As an important form of higher education quality assurance,the legal regulation of higher education certification has become the forefront issue of the legal research and practice of higher education in the two major legal systems represented by Germany and the United States.In Germany,higher education accreditation is incorporated into the framework and system of public law.As an intervention of basic rights,whether higher education certification constitutes a violation of the basic rights of academic freedom and whether it violates the basic principles of the rule of law,such as the principle of legal retention and proportionality,constitute the focus of the review of the constitutionality and legality of higher education certification in Germany.In the United States,certification bodies have the legal status of private associations.For a long time,the courts have treated the certification body with a modest restriction.However,as the laws that affect the relationship between the federal government,certification agencies,and higher education institutions have evolved,the"private label"applicable to certification agencies is becoming increasingly outdated,the emerging concept that certification agencies as"government actors"has sparked constitutional discussions.Although the legal regulations for higher education certification in Germany and the United States have very different logical starting points and traditions,both of them aim to promote the integration of academic freedom and the public interest,and emphasize restrictions on public powers unique to higher education certification.For China,higher education accreditation,represented by professional accreditation,has a distinctive"public administration"color.It is necessary to carry out a forced reform and adjustment of higher education certification system through the public regulation of higher education certification,which is an inevitable requirement for the quality guarantee of higher education in China to move towards the rule of law.