146 Harvard Human Rights Journal Vol.20 A.Historical Background:Universities in Post-1949 China When the Communist government came to power in 1949,it fully ab- sorbed all educational institutions into the state-run framework and dra- matically reorganized the entire education sector based on the Soviet model.14 The education system was consciously redesigned to serve the na- tional economic plan.5 The Ministry of Education standardized university curricula for all subjects and strictly enforced its requirement that schools use the government-created curricula.16 Over the ensuing decades,the education system was decimated by politi- cal purges of faculty and administrators caught on the wrong side of rapidly shifting political winds and the elimination of entire disciplines considered inconsistent with Party ideology.The Cultural Revolution virtually shut down the university system,as students donned Red Guard armbands,and the Gang of Four encouraged campus radicals to attack their professors as symbols of Western bourgeois expertise.17 In the late 1970s,the Chinese government began picking up the pieces of its shattered higher education system.The government returned author- ity over the university system to the Ministry of Education,which had itself been closed down for part of the Cultural Revolution.'s Universities re- opened departments that had been closed for decades for ideological reasons, including sociology and anthropology,19 and the pursuit of technical and scientific knowledge became a key part of central government policy under the banner of the so-called "four modernizations."University admissions tests were once again instituted,and ideological factors such as an appli- cant's class background,which had been given pride of place during the Cultural Revolution,were largely discarded as part of the admissions process.20 The year 1979 saw the reform era's first calls for academic autonomy.In June of that year,four prominent university presidents published a public appeal in the pages of the People's Daily calling for more academic autonomy for all institutions of higher education.21 This appeal was followed by an 14.SUZANNE PEPPER,RADICALISM AND EDUCATION REFORM IN 20TH-CENTURY CHINA 157-58 (1996). 15.Broader geographical distribution of educational institutions was also emphasized:each prov- ince would have its own medical,agricultural,and teacher-training schools,and the comprehensive universities that were set up were also geographically dispersed.Id.at 177. 16.1d.at187. 17.For a detailed account of the damage done to the education system during the Cultural Revolu- tion,see ld.at 259-352. 18.Id.at480. 19.RUTH HAYHOE,CHINA's UNIVERSITIES 1895-1995:A CENTURY OF CULTURAL CONFLICT 123 (1996). 20.PEPPER,supra note 14,at 479. 21.Li Xiaoping,University Autonomy in Chind:History,Present Situation,and Perspective,in ORGAN- ZATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT,CURRENT ISSUES IN CHINESE HIGHER EDU- CATION 38 (2001),avilable at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000 000b/80/27/aclh.pdf
\\server05\productn\H\HLH\20\HLH2001.txt unknown Seq: 6 12-JUN-07 16:27 146 Harvard Human Rights Journal / Vol. 20 A. Historical Background: Universities in Post-1949 China When the Communist government came to power in 1949, it fully absorbed all educational institutions into the state-run framework and dramatically reorganized the entire education sector based on the Soviet model.14 The education system was consciously redesigned to serve the national economic plan.15 The Ministry of Education standardized university curricula for all subjects and strictly enforced its requirement that schools use the government-created curricula.16 Over the ensuing decades, the education system was decimated by political purges of faculty and administrators caught on the wrong side of rapidly shifting political winds and the elimination of entire disciplines considered inconsistent with Party ideology. The Cultural Revolution virtually shut down the university system, as students donned Red Guard armbands, and the Gang of Four encouraged campus radicals to attack their professors as symbols of Western bourgeois expertise.17 In the late 1970s, the Chinese government began picking up the pieces of its shattered higher education system. The government returned authority over the university system to the Ministry of Education, which had itself been closed down for part of the Cultural Revolution.18 Universities reopened departments that had been closed for decades for ideological reasons, including sociology and anthropology,19 and the pursuit of technical and scientific knowledge became a key part of central government policy under the banner of the so-called “four modernizations.” University admissions tests were once again instituted, and ideological factors such as an applicant’s class background, which had been given pride of place during the Cultural Revolution, were largely discarded as part of the admissions process.20 The year 1979 saw the reform era’s first calls for academic autonomy. In June of that year, four prominent university presidents published a public appeal in the pages of the People’s Daily calling for more academic autonomy for all institutions of higher education.21 This appeal was followed by an 14. SUZANNE PEPPER, RADICALISM AND EDUCATION REFORM IN 20TH-CENTURY CHINA 157–58 (1996). 15. Broader geographical distribution of educational institutions was also emphasized: each province would have its own medical, agricultural, and teacher-training schools, and the comprehensive universities that were set up were also geographically dispersed. Id. at 177. 16. Id. at 187. 17. For a detailed account of the damage done to the education system during the Cultural Revolution, see Id. at 259–352. 18. Id. at 480. 19. RUTH HAYHOE, CHINA’S UNIVERSITIES 1895–1995: A CENTURY OF CULTURAL CONFLICT 123 (1996). 20. PEPPER, supra note 14, at 479. R 21. Li Xiaoping, University Autonomy in China: History, Present Situation, and Perspective, in ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT, CURRENT ISSUES IN CHINESE HIGHER EDUCATION 38 (2001), available at http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000 000b/80/27/ac/fa.pdf
2007/“Courageous Explorers” 147 editorial arguing that university autonomy was "a problem that needed to be discussed thoroughly,"and that new ideas should be encouraged.2 In 1985,the Party's Central Committee issued the Decision on Reform of the Education System,which emphasized the need for greater institutional autonomy and called for an end to excessive government intervention in the education sector.23 The decision also called for greater coordination between universities and entities engaged in material production,so that institu- tions of higher learning could play a more useful role in economic develop- ment.24 Under the decision,the government delegated some authority over academic programs,personnel,and finance to the universities themselves.25 That document was soon followed by State Council regulations that sought to give universities greater authority over certain functions,includ- ing admissions,financial administration,hiring and firing decisions,and international academic exchanges.These regulations empowered universi- ties themselves to choose several senior school officials,including the vice president,other senior administrative officers,and professors,rather than passively accepting Party or Ministry of Education appointments.26 The power to appoint university presidents,however,remained with the govern- ment,usually the Ministry of Education.27 The impact of these reforms was significant.For example,universities could now experiment in the area of curriculum development.Many of them did,seeking to develop materials that would be more likely to attract students,some of whom were paying for the privilege of education for the first time since 1949.While the Ministry of Education still issued curricu- lum documents,universities could now view the documents as "reference materials"that could be disregarded in favor of other approaches.28 The increasing dependence of universities on self-generated funds further enhanced autonomy.In many cases,the government gave universities only enough cash to meet their basic needs,leaving universities responsible for generating funding for any additional requirements.The drive to find and create moneymaking programs created a hierarchy of academic departments not dissimilar to the dynamic found at some Western institutions:those faculties and schools that could generate funds,such as engineering,fi- nance,and foreign languages,leapt ahead of many of those that could not, 22.1d. 23.Ka-ho Mok,Globalization and Edncational Restructuring:University Merging and Changing Govern- ame in Cbind,50 HIGHER EDUC.57,65 (2005). 24.1d. 25.Ningsha Zhong Ruth Hayhoe,University Automomy in Ticentieth-Century China,in EDUCA. TION,CULTURE,AND IDENTITY IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY CHINA 265,276(Glen Peterson et al.eds., 2001). 26.1d. 27.RUIQING DU,CHINESE HIGHER EDUCATION 23(1992). 28.1d
\\server05\productn\H\HLH\20\HLH2001.txt unknown Seq: 7 12-JUN-07 16:27 2007 / “Courageous Explorers” 147 editorial arguing that university autonomy was “a problem that needed to be discussed thoroughly,” and that new ideas should be encouraged.22 In 1985, the Party’s Central Committee issued the Decision on Reform of the Education System, which emphasized the need for greater institutional autonomy and called for an end to excessive government intervention in the education sector.23 The decision also called for greater coordination between universities and entities engaged in material production, so that institutions of higher learning could play a more useful role in economic development.24 Under the decision, the government delegated some authority over academic programs, personnel, and finance to the universities themselves.25 That document was soon followed by State Council regulations that sought to give universities greater authority over certain functions, including admissions, financial administration, hiring and firing decisions, and international academic exchanges. These regulations empowered universities themselves to choose several senior school officials, including the vice president, other senior administrative officers, and professors, rather than passively accepting Party or Ministry of Education appointments.26 The power to appoint university presidents, however, remained with the government, usually the Ministry of Education.27 The impact of these reforms was significant. For example, universities could now experiment in the area of curriculum development. Many of them did, seeking to develop materials that would be more likely to attract students, some of whom were paying for the privilege of education for the first time since 1949. While the Ministry of Education still issued curriculum documents, universities could now view the documents as “reference materials” that could be disregarded in favor of other approaches.28 The increasing dependence of universities on self-generated funds further enhanced autonomy. In many cases, the government gave universities only enough cash to meet their basic needs, leaving universities responsible for generating funding for any additional requirements. The drive to find and create moneymaking programs created a hierarchy of academic departments not dissimilar to the dynamic found at some Western institutions: those faculties and schools that could generate funds, such as engineering, finance, and foreign languages, leapt ahead of many of those that could not, 22. Id. 23. Ka-ho Mok, Globalization and Educational Restructuring: University Merging and Changing Governance in China, 50 HIGHER EDUC. 57, 65 (2005). 24. Id. 25. Ningsha Zhong & Ruth Hayhoe, University Autonomy in Twentieth-Century China, in EDUCATION, CULTURE, AND IDENTITY IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY CHINA 265, 276 (Glen Peterson et al. eds., 2001). 26. Id. 27. RUIQING DU, CHINESE HIGHER EDUCATION 23 (1992). 28. Id
148 Harvard Human Rights Journal Vol.20 including agricultural schools and other institutions that specialized in less seemingly“modern”subject areas.29 The 1989 student protests brought to a standstill the trend toward greater autonomy.After the government intervened with military force to end the protests in June 1989,it dramatically reasserted authority over the university system as a whole.30 Over the next three years,the number of Party members appointed to senior positions within Chinese universities rose dramatically,and ideological study requirements for both students and professors were increased.31 At Peking University and certain other institu- tions more directly tied to the 1989 unrest,year-long military-ideological training courses were required for all new students.32 These new require- ments led to a precipitous drop in enrollments as students sought out schools that did not require a year of indoctrination before setting foot on campus.33 The Party's retrenchment was relatively short-lived.In 1992,the State Education Council issued a policy document that reiterated the need for university autonomy,and in 1993,the State Council followed suit,recom- mending that university authority be expanded in several key areas.34 B.University Autonomy in the Contemporary Context:From Policy to Law Beginning in the mid-1980s,the Chinese government began to codify its policy pronouncements in a system of laws,which ranged from the rela- tively broad provisions of the national-level legislation to the more detailed regulations issued by the Ministry of Education and other government agencies to the rules and regulations of the schools themselves.35 Between 1985 and 2000,the government issued more than one thousand laws,rules, 29.HAYHOE,supra note 19,at 121 30.Luo Xu,Farewell to Idealism:Mapping China's University Students of the 1990s,13 J.CONTEMP. CHNA779,782(2004). 31.Id.For a more recent description of propaganda campaigns on Chinese campuses,see Paul Mooney,Campu Life Prover Difficult for China's Little Emperors:Pampered at Home,Students Rebel against Squalid Dorms and Limits on Their Freedom,CHRON.OF HIGHER EDUC.,Nov.25,2005,available at http:/ /chronicle.com/weekly/v52/i14/14a04601.htm. 32.Chengzhi Wang,From Manpouer Supply to Economic Revival Governance and Financing of Chinese Higber Education,EDUC.PoL'Y ANALYSIS ARCHIVES,June 5,2000,available at http://epaa.asu.cdu/epaal v8n26.html;se also Wei Feng,Facets of the Crisis in Institutions of Higher Learning,CHINESE EDUC.AND SoC'Y,Nov.-Dec.1996,at 10. 33.For an argument that the drop in enrollments at Peking University was more closely related to market forces than military requirements,see Wei Feng,swpra note 32. 34.Li Xiaoping,supra note 21. 35.One Chinese scholar estimated that,between the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949 and 1985,the government issued roughly five hundred education laws,regulations,and other related documents,the vast majority of which had either expired or were abolished by 1987.In con- trast,in the fifteen years from 1985 to 2000,the government issued more than one thousand rules, regulations,and other documents related to education,more than twice the output of the prior thirty- five years.At present,pre-1985 regulations are believed to constitute less than 5 percent of the total regulatory framework.Shen Kui,Rule of Law and Public Higher Edmcation Institutions,CHINESE EDUC. Soc'Y,July-Aug.2006,at 11,52 n.10
\\server05\productn\H\HLH\20\HLH2001.txt unknown Seq: 8 12-JUN-07 16:27 148 Harvard Human Rights Journal / Vol. 20 including agricultural schools and other institutions that specialized in less seemingly “modern” subject areas.29 The 1989 student protests brought to a standstill the trend toward greater autonomy. After the government intervened with military force to end the protests in June 1989, it dramatically reasserted authority over the university system as a whole.30 Over the next three years, the number of Party members appointed to senior positions within Chinese universities rose dramatically, and ideological study requirements for both students and professors were increased.31 At Peking University and certain other institutions more directly tied to the 1989 unrest, year-long military-ideological training courses were required for all new students.32 These new requirements led to a precipitous drop in enrollments as students sought out schools that did not require a year of indoctrination before setting foot on campus.33 The Party’s retrenchment was relatively short-lived. In 1992, the State Education Council issued a policy document that reiterated the need for university autonomy, and in 1993, the State Council followed suit, recommending that university authority be expanded in several key areas.34 B. University Autonomy in the Contemporary Context: From Policy to Law Beginning in the mid-1980s, the Chinese government began to codify its policy pronouncements in a system of laws, which ranged from the relatively broad provisions of the national-level legislation to the more detailed regulations issued by the Ministry of Education and other government agencies to the rules and regulations of the schools themselves.35 Between 1985 and 2000, the government issued more than one thousand laws, rules, 29. HAYHOE, supra note 19, at 121. R 30. Luo Xu, Farewell to Idealism: Mapping China’s University Students of the 1990s, 13 J. CONTEMP. CHINA 779, 782 (2004). 31. Id. For a more recent description of propaganda campaigns on Chinese campuses, see Paul Mooney, Campus Life Proves Difficult for China’s Little Emperors: Pampered at Home, Students Rebel against Squalid Dorms and Limits on Their Freedom, CHRON. OF HIGHER EDUC., Nov. 25, 2005, available at http:/ /chronicle.com/weekly/v52/i14/14a04601.htm. 32. Chengzhi Wang, From Manpower Supply to Economic Revival Governance and Financing of Chinese Higher Education, EDUC. POL’Y ANALYSIS ARCHIVES, June 5, 2000, available at http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/ v8n26.html; see also Wei Feng, Facets of the Crisis in Institutions of Higher Learning, CHINESE EDUC. AND SOC’Y, Nov.–Dec. 1996, at 10. 33. For an argument that the drop in enrollments at Peking University was more closely related to market forces than military requirements, see Wei Feng, supra note 32. R 34. Li Xiaoping, supra note 21. R 35. One Chinese scholar estimated that, between the founding of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 and 1985, the government issued roughly five hundred education laws, regulations, and other related documents, the vast majority of which had either expired or were abolished by 1987. In contrast, in the fifteen years from 1985 to 2000, the government issued more than one thousand rules, regulations, and other documents related to education, more than twice the output of the prior thirtyfive years. At present, pre-1985 regulations are believed to constitute less than 5 percent of the total regulatory framework. Shen Kui, Rule of Law and Public Higher Education Institutions, CHINESE EDUC. & SOC’Y, July–Aug. 2006, at 11, 52 n.10
2007/“Courageous Explorers” 149 regulations,and other documents related to education.36 In general,the law sought to give substance to the government's policy pronouncements of greater autonomy for schools,while at the same time preserving significant government oversight.37 The result in many cases is a system of split au- thority in which schools have significant latitude to make important deci- sions,but must have these decisions approved by the government. The various policy statements on increased academic autonomy were adopted into law for the first time in 1995 with the passage of the Educa- tion Law.38 Under Article 28 of the Education Law,educational institutions have the right to "autonomous management according to the [school's] constitution."39 Article 30 guarantees educational institutions the right to form their own management structure in accordance with government reg- ulations.40 Article 31 makes clear that schools that meet certain criteria are independent legal persons,and that all schools "enjoy civil rights and inter- ests and bear civil liabilities in civil activities according to law."4 The Higher Education Law,passed in 1998,contains similar language.42 That law empowers universities to "run [their]schools on their own,"and gives them explicit,though by no means complete,authority over budgets; the hiring,firing,and evaluation of personnel;curriculum;and enrollment.43 Unfortunately,these provisions are undermined-at least rhetorically,if not legally-by other provisions in the same laws that mandate educational content.Under Article 6 of the Education Law,the government takes a 36.1d. 37.Despite the continued experimentation with private and quasi-private schooling,the vast ma- jority of China's universities are state-run,and receive most of their funding,outside of student tuition, from the government.Both the Communist Party and the government are intensely involved in the appointment of many university presidents,especially at elite universities in Beijing,Shanghai,and elsewhere.Indeed,the presidents of top Chinese universities have a governmental rank of vice minister, and are chosen by the State Council.The selection of presidents of other schools is usually handled by the Ministry of Education.RuQING Du,supra note 27,at 23.Although the government has recently allowed for the creation of quasi-private universities,these institutions are relatively few in number,and are subject to strict government oversight.The creation and administration of private education institu- tions is governed by the Non-Governmental Education Promotion Law of the People's Republic of China (adopted by the Standing Comm.of the Nat'I People's Cong.on Dec.28,2002,effective Sept.1, 2003)(P.R.C.),ailble at http://www.moe.edu.cn/edoas/website18/info1433.htm. 38.Education Law of the People's Republic of China (promulgated by the Nat'l People's Cong.on Mar.18,1995,effective Sept.1,1995)(P.R.C.),ailable at http://www.moc.edu.cn/english/laws_e. htm. 39.1d.art.28. 40.1d.art.30 41.Id.art.31 42.Higher Education Law of the People's Republic of China (adopted by the Standing Comm.of the Nat'l People's Cong.on Aug.29,1988,promulgated by Order No.7 of the President of the PRC, Aug.29,1988,effective Jan.1,1999)(P.R.C.),aailable at http://www.moc.edu.cn/english/laws_h. htm. 43.Id.The State's overall authority was also clearly delineated in this 1998 law.Article 13 of the law states that"the State Council shall provide unified guidance and administration for higher educa- tion,"and that provincial governments also have responsibility over the universities in their jurisdic- tion.Id.art.13
\\server05\productn\H\HLH\20\HLH2001.txt unknown Seq: 9 12-JUN-07 16:27 2007 / “Courageous Explorers” 149 regulations, and other documents related to education.36 In general, the law sought to give substance to the government’s policy pronouncements of greater autonomy for schools, while at the same time preserving significant government oversight.37 The result in many cases is a system of split authority in which schools have significant latitude to make important decisions, but must have these decisions approved by the government. The various policy statements on increased academic autonomy were adopted into law for the first time in 1995 with the passage of the Education Law.38 Under Article 28 of the Education Law, educational institutions have the right to “autonomous management according to the [school’s] constitution.”39 Article 30 guarantees educational institutions the right to form their own management structure in accordance with government regulations.40 Article 31 makes clear that schools that meet certain criteria are independent legal persons, and that all schools “enjoy civil rights and interests and bear civil liabilities in civil activities according to law.”41 The Higher Education Law, passed in 1998, contains similar language.42 That law empowers universities to “run [their] schools on their own,” and gives them explicit, though by no means complete, authority over budgets; the hiring, firing, and evaluation of personnel; curriculum; and enrollment.43 Unfortunately, these provisions are undermined—at least rhetorically, if not legally—by other provisions in the same laws that mandate educational content. Under Article 6 of the Education Law, the government takes a 36. Id. 37. Despite the continued experimentation with private and quasi-private schooling, the vast majority of China’s universities are state-run, and receive most of their funding, outside of student tuition, from the government. Both the Communist Party and the government are intensely involved in the appointment of many university presidents, especially at elite universities in Beijing, Shanghai, and elsewhere. Indeed, the presidents of top Chinese universities have a governmental rank of vice minister, and are chosen by the State Council. The selection of presidents of other schools is usually handled by the Ministry of Education. RUIQING DU, supra note 27, at 23. Although the government has recently R allowed for the creation of quasi-private universities, these institutions are relatively few in number, and are subject to strict government oversight. The creation and administration of private education institutions is governed by the Non-Governmental Education Promotion Law of the People’s Republic of China (adopted by the Standing Comm. of the Nat’l People’s Cong. on Dec. 28, 2002, effective Sept. 1, 2003) (P.R.C.), available at http://www.moe.edu.cn/edoas/website18/info1433.htm. 38. Education Law of the People’s Republic of China (promulgated by the Nat’l People’s Cong. on Mar. 18, 1995, effective Sept. 1, 1995) (P.R.C.), available at http://www.moe.edu.cn/english/laws_e. htm. 39. Id. art. 28. 40. Id. art. 30. 41. Id. art. 31. 42. Higher Education Law of the People’s Republic of China (adopted by the Standing Comm. of the Nat’l People’s Cong. on Aug. 29, 1988, promulgated by Order No. 7 of the President of the PRC, Aug. 29, 1988, effective Jan. 1, 1999) (P.R.C.), available at http://www.moe.edu.cn/english/laws_h. htm. 43. Id. The State’s overall authority was also clearly delineated in this 1998 law. Article 13 of the law states that “the State Council shall provide unified guidance and administration for higher education,” and that provincial governments also have responsibility over the universities in their jurisdiction. Id. art. 13
150 Harvard Human Rights Journal Vol.20 “patriotic,"“collectivist,”and“socialist”approach to education.44 In addi-- tion,"Marxism,Leninism,and Mao Zedong Thought"are explicitly placed at the center of the educational "cause."45 More important than the provisions on Marxism and socialism are those provisions that divide authority between universities and the state,the lat- ter usually represented by the Ministry of Education.Often,the legal divi- sion of authority creates a somewhat complicated structure in which universities make decisions according to government rules,and then submit those decisions for government approval.46 Just as education law in China delegates authority to educational institu- tions,it also creates legal rights for educators,students,and institutions of higher learning.Article 33 of the Education Law,for example,creates an obligation on the state to "protect the legitimate rights and interests of teachers,"and states that employment issues related to teachers,such as remuneration,will be handled by law.47 Under Article 42 of the Education Law,students have the right to bring a complaint against a school if they disagree with disciplinary action taken by that school.4s Under the same 44.Education Law of the People's Republic of China,supra note 38,art.6.It is unclear what,if any,legal effect such language has.Nonetheless,Article 6 and other similar provisions do reflect the deep involvement of the Communist Party in education policy in China. 45.Education Law of the People's Republic of China,spra note 38,art.3.The Higher Education Law repeats these strictures.Article 3 of the Higher Education Law is virtually identical to Article 3 of the Education Law.Article 4 of the Higher Education Law requires that"[hjigher education shall be conducted in adherence to the educational principles of the State,in the service of the socialist moderni- zation drive....in order that the educatees shall become builders and successors for the socialist cause."Higher Education Law of the People's Republic of China,supra note 42,arts.3,4. 46.The conferral of academic degrees is one example of this hybrid approach.Both the Education Law and the Higher Education Law make clear that the state is responsible for the conferral of academic degrees.Education Law of the People's Republic of China,supra note 38,art.22;Higher Education Law of the People's Republic of China,supra note 42,art.22.The state exercises its authority to grant degrees through the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees,under which it delegates degree-granting authority to approved universities.Regulations of the People's Republic of China on Academic Degrees (adopted at the 13th meeting of the Standing Comm.of the 5th Nat'l People's Cong.and promulgated by Order No.5 of the Standing Comm.of the Nat'l People's Cong.on Feb.12,1980,effective Jan.1,1981)(P.R.C.),arailable at http://www.novexcn.com/academic_degrees. html.Under Article 8 of the Academic Degree Regulations,the State Council must approve all schools wishing to issue degrees.All schools issuing degrees are required to set up a two-tiered system for conferring master's and doctorate degrees.The system consists of a dissertation committee based in each department,and an academic degree evaluation committee,based in each degree-granting unit within a university.Id.arts.9,10. The process itself passes through both entities:First,a dissertation committee evaluates and either approves or rejects an individual student's master's or doctorate thesis (bachelor's degrees are approved by the university's academic degree evaluation committee).If the departmental dissertation committee approves the student's thesis,it then sends a resolution recommending the candidate for receipt of a degree.The academic degree evaluation committee then votes on each individual resolution;those it accepts are granted a degree by the university.Id.arts.10,11.If the thesis is rejected by the disserta- tion committee,then the student can be issued a certificate of completion by the university.Schools must submit a list of persons to whom they are awarding master's or doctorate degrees to the govern- ment "for the record."Id.art.10(2). 47.Education Law of the People's Republic of China,supra note 38,art.33. 48.1d.art.42
\\server05\productn\H\HLH\20\HLH2001.txt unknown Seq: 10 12-JUN-07 16:27 150 Harvard Human Rights Journal / Vol. 20 “patriotic,” “collectivist,” and “socialist” approach to education.44 In addition, “Marxism, Leninism, and Mao Zedong Thought” are explicitly placed at the center of the educational “cause.”45 More important than the provisions on Marxism and socialism are those provisions that divide authority between universities and the state, the latter usually represented by the Ministry of Education. Often, the legal division of authority creates a somewhat complicated structure in which universities make decisions according to government rules, and then submit those decisions for government approval.46 Just as education law in China delegates authority to educational institutions, it also creates legal rights for educators, students, and institutions of higher learning. Article 33 of the Education Law, for example, creates an obligation on the state to “protect the legitimate rights and interests of teachers,” and states that employment issues related to teachers, such as remuneration, will be handled by law.47 Under Article 42 of the Education Law, students have the right to bring a complaint against a school if they disagree with disciplinary action taken by that school.48 Under the same 44. Education Law of the People’s Republic of China, supra note 38, art. 6. It is unclear what, if R any, legal effect such language has. Nonetheless, Article 6 and other similar provisions do reflect the deep involvement of the Communist Party in education policy in China. 45. Education Law of the People’s Republic of China, supra note 38, art. 3. The Higher Education R Law repeats these strictures. Article 3 of the Higher Education Law is virtually identical to Article 3 of the Education Law. Article 4 of the Higher Education Law requires that “[h]igher education shall be conducted in adherence to the educational principles of the State, in the service of the socialist modernization drive . . . . in order that the educatees shall become builders and successors for the socialist cause.” Higher Education Law of the People’s Republic of China, supra note 42, arts. 3, 4. R 46. The conferral of academic degrees is one example of this hybrid approach. Both the Education Law and the Higher Education Law make clear that the state is responsible for the conferral of academic degrees. Education Law of the People’s Republic of China, supra note 38, art. 22; Higher Education Law R of the People’s Republic of China, supra note 42, art. 22. The state exercises its authority to grant R degrees through the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on Academic Degrees, under which it delegates degree-granting authority to approved universities. Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on Academic Degrees (adopted at the 13th meeting of the Standing Comm. of the 5th Nat’l People’s Cong. and promulgated by Order No. 5 of the Standing Comm. of the Nat’l People’s Cong. on Feb. 12, 1980, effective Jan. 1, 1981) (P.R.C.), available at http://www.novexcn.com/academic_degrees. html. Under Article 8 of the Academic Degree Regulations, the State Council must approve all schools wishing to issue degrees. All schools issuing degrees are required to set up a two-tiered system for conferring master’s and doctorate degrees. The system consists of a dissertation committee based in each department, and an academic degree evaluation committee, based in each degree-granting unit within a university. Id. arts. 9, 10. The process itself passes through both entities: First, a dissertation committee evaluates and either approves or rejects an individual student’s master’s or doctorate thesis (bachelor’s degrees are approved by the university’s academic degree evaluation committee). If the departmental dissertation committee approves the student’s thesis, it then sends a resolution recommending the candidate for receipt of a degree. The academic degree evaluation committee then votes on each individual resolution; those it accepts are granted a degree by the university. Id. arts. 10, 11. If the thesis is rejected by the dissertation committee, then the student can be issued a certificate of completion by the university. Schools must submit a list of persons to whom they are awarding master’s or doctorate degrees to the government “for the record.” Id. art. 10(2). 47. Education Law of the People’s Republic of China, supra note 38, art. 33. R 48. Id. art. 42