The Supreme Administrative Court has annulled the university assessment methodology of the National Agency for Evaluation and Accreditation (NAEA). This is clear from a decision of the SAC dated April 1 this year. It is unclear in the situation that has arisen, which according to lawyers is unprecedented, what will happen to both the already completed accreditation procedures and the current and future ones.
After the amendments to the Higher Education Act adopted in 2020, the program accreditation of universities is now done differently - it is now carried out simultaneously for a given professional field in all universities that offer it, instead of separately. The NAEA also had to develop a new methodology for program accreditation, in which the quantitative indicators of higher education institutions would prevail (70%) over the qualitative ones, in order to achieve greater objectivity. It was not ready for a long time, with work on it last starting in 2024, writes "Sega".
However, one of the universities - the Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs - has appealed the methodology, as according to them it was adopted in violation of the law. The court also ruled the same. According to the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court, the methodology was issued in the event of "significant violations of the procedural rules and in contradiction with the substantive law". A number of irregularities are listed - no public consultations were held, the project was not published on the institution's website, and no reasons and report were prepared for it. "In an undoubted and indisputable manner, it has been established in the case that the contested bylaw was not promulgated, which is in contradiction with the imperative requirements of the Constitution, which is why it was issued in substantial violations of the administrative procedural rules and in violation of the substantive law and should be annulled", the court wrote. And it sentenced the Agency to pay the Academy of the Ministry of Interior 143.16 euros in costs of the case.
According to lawyers, this is the first time that such an act of the NEAA has been annulled and it is not clear what will happen from now on. "What happens to the procedures that have already been completed, and with the current and future ones, does accreditation stop?," rectors ask. They wonder whether the accreditation procedures carried out using illegal methodology are actually legal. "Now" asked these questions of the Accreditation Agency. They replied that they were not familiar with the court decision and could not comment on it.
The program accreditation schedule on the Agency's website shows that in April 2025, accreditation of the fields of religion, transport, medicine, veterinary medicine and military affairs began, and in September 2025 - of social activities, law, economics, chemical and biological sciences, metallurgy, mineral exploration, plant breeding, forestry, fine arts, etc. The accreditation period is 1 year.
The Agency's website also shows that it has begun an analysis of the applicability of quantitative and qualitative indicators for program accreditation. In 2025, a roundtable was held to discuss changes in the methodology, with universities providing suggestions for revisions. The NEAA has also announced a survey - until the end of January 2026, in which higher education institutions can note their ideas for changing some of the indicators.
On March 23, the NEAA released a draft methodology for calculating the score, including a component that would reflect the contribution of higher education institutions to the development of the professional field in a competitive environment. "This will allow for a more balanced final result when comparing the results of the program accreditation procedures, which would also take into account the functioning of higher education institutions in the context of competition between them", the agency explained. Its discussion is until April 22, 2020. In its explanatory notes, the Agency states that the current methodology is trial and structured as an appendix to the Rules for Evaluation in Conducting Accreditation Procedures, and now it needs to be separated as a separate document.