Higher Education In UAE: What New National Rules Mean For Universities, Students

(MENAFN- Khaleej Times) Universities and higher education institutions across the UAE are entering a more closely integrated national regulatory system, with new Cabinet resolutions setting out how institutions are licensed, programmes approved, reviews funded, students protected and violations penalised.

The four new resolutions, introduced to universities at the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research's Future of Higher Education Dialogues forum in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday, cover the full institutional journey, from establishing and licensing an institution to programme accreditation, renewal, financial sustainability and regulatory enforcement.

Recommended For You

The Ministry said the framework is designed around three broad principles: protecting students, maintaining the quality of higher education and clarifying the respective roles of federal and local authorities.

Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels.

Undersecretary Dr Ahmed Sultan Al Shoaibi said the four resolutions were developed through consultation with the sector and were intended to close gaps in the previous system, including differences in how regulations, fees and violations were applied.

Together, the measures create a system in which regulatory oversight is increasingly linked to risk, compliance, performance and the outcomes produced by institutions and their programmes.

Single framework for university licensing

Cabinet Resolution No. 104 of 2026 establishes the National Framework for Licensing Higher Education Institutions, creating a unified national reference for licensing higher education institutions and their branches across the UAE, including institutions operating in free zones.

The framework came into force in June 2026.

It distinguishes between institutional licensure and programme accreditation.

Institutional licensure establishes whether an institution is ready, sustainable and capable of delivering its educational mission. Programme accreditation, meanwhile, assesses the quality and learning outcomes of individual academic programmes.

Crucially, obtaining an institutional licence does not allow a university to immediately start offering any programme it chooses.

A programme must receive programme accreditation before it can be offered, advertised or accept students, according to the Ministry's explanation of the framework.

The framework applies to new and existing institutions, as well as institutions and branches inside and outside free zones.

Local authorities retain their powers and may impose additional requirements within their areas of competence, provided these do not conflict with federal requirements.

For institutions operating in free zones, a local permit must precede the federal institutional licence. For institutions outside free zones, the relevant local approvals or requirements must be fulfilled before the federal licensing decision is completed.

The framework also aims to reduce duplication between federal and local regulators by establishing clearer links between the Ministry, local authorities and institutions.

What universities must prepare for

The licensing system is no longer simply a one-off approval.

The framework requires institutions to maintain accurate and updated data and integrate electronically with the Ministry's systems. Institutions must also have measures covering information security, data incidents and business continuity.

One of the most significant requirements is a student protection and academic continuity plan for situations in which an institution faces serious operational or financial difficulties.

Such plans must address how students can continue their studies, including possible transfer to another institution, recognition of completed credit hours, preservation of academic records and protection of financial rights.

The framework also regulates ownership, governance and leadership structures, with a clear separation between ownership, executive management and academic decision-making. It includes requirements linked to financial sustainability, audited financial statements, financial guarantees and student protection.

For existing institutions, licensing is treated as a continuing process rather than an endpoint. Universities are expected to assess gaps between their existing practices and the new framework, strengthen data integration and continuity plans, and maintain evidence of quality and performance in preparation for renewal.

Renewal applications must be submitted at least 90 days before the existing licence expires.

The length of a licence can also vary depending on an institution's risk, compliance and performance profile rather than being identical for every university.

There is some flexibility for exceptional cases. The framework allows extensions relating to programme accreditation in justified cases, including an extension of up to two years under specified conditions, while an additional period of up to 90 days may be granted for completing required information for a new programme.

Institutions must also obtain prior approval for specified material changes, including changes to their name, creation of academic units, opening a branch or changing their main premises. More significant changes, such as mergers, transfers of licences or changes in effective control, also require prior approval.

Review fees

Cabinet Resolution No. 92 of 2026 deals with review fees for higher education institutions and technical and vocational education and training institutions.

The resolution establishes a clearer financial framework around the external review and evaluation work required for institutional and programme licensing, accreditation and renewals.

At the forum, Ministry officials said the review fees are intended to fund the review process itself, including the use of specialised external and international evaluators and experts.

The resolution also establishes a Review Fund for Higher Education Institutions and TVET institutions, into which review fees are transferred. The fund is intended to finance licensing and accreditation reviews and the engagement of specialised evaluators, experts and institutions.

The Ministry said the system is intended to make the costs associated with reviews clearer to institutions and help them plan financially for licensing, accreditation and renewal.

The forum presentation indicated different review fees depending on the type of institutional or programme review, with separate treatment for academic programmes and TVET institutions. The Ministry also said the structure takes account of the different technical requirements involved in evaluating different types of programmes.

This is separate from the service fees set out under Resolution 103.

Resolution 103: Service fees and financial guarantees

Cabinet Resolution No. 103 of 2026 sets out the fees charged for services provided by the Ministry, as well as financial guarantees required when higher education institutions are licensed.

For higher education institutions, the listed fees include:

Dh100,000 for institutional licensing, as a one-time fee.

Dh15,000 annually per programme for programme accreditation or renewal, capped at Dh200,000 per institution annually.

Dh50 per application for recognition of university, technical and vocational qualifications issued inside or outside the UAE.

Dh10,000 annually per student for supervision of scholarship students studying abroad.

For TVET institutions, the schedule sets a Dh100,000 fee every three years for accreditation or renewal of a qualifications-awarding body, Dh5,000 annually for institutional accreditation or renewal, and Dh5,000 annually per programme for programme accreditation or renewal, capped at Dh25,000 per institution annually.

Training institutes and centres face a Dh5,000 annual fee for issuing or renewing a training licence and Dh2,000 for an amendment.

The resolution also introduces financial guarantees for higher education institutions, with the amount linked to student numbers:

Institution size	Financial guarantee
Fewer than 500 students	Dh200,000
5012,000 students	Dh400,000
2,0014,000 students	Dh800,000
More than 4,000 students	Dh1 million

Federal and local public higher education institutions are exempt from these guarantees.

Private institutions holding a local permit are also exempt from the federal guarantee where the competent local authority already requires an equivalent financial guarantee or measure that protects students' rights and ensures continuity of the academic process.

The Minister will determine the circumstances and procedures for reducing, exempting, returning or liquidating guarantees.

The resolution also provides exemptions from some fees for public institutions, strategically important institutions and programmes, certain non-profit institutions, newly established institutions in remote or less-developed areas, and internationally prestigious institutions attracted to the UAE by government entities.

For existing institutions, the fees and guarantees generally take effect from the beginning of the financial year following the resolution's entry into force, while the specified fees and guarantees apply immediately to new institutions. The resolution repeals the previous Cabinet Resolution No. 81 of 2025.

New penalty system for universities

Cabinet Resolution No. 143 of 2026 establishes a detailed national framework for violations, penalties and administrative measures covering higher education institutions, TVET institutions and training centres.

It comes into effect on September 12, 2026.

The regulation is not limited to fines. It creates a graduated system of warnings, corrective measures, suspension of admissions or programmes, financial penalties, withdrawal of accreditation or licences and, in serious or repeated cases, closure or permanent restrictions on those responsible for operating institutions.

The Ministry stressed at the forum that the purpose is not simply to punish institutions but to encourage prevention, early compliance and protection of students.

Unaccredited programmes are a violation

The new rules make clear that offering an academic programme, admitting students to it or allowing students to study in it without programme accreditation is a violation.

For a first violation, an institution can be warned and required to stop offering the programme and admitting students until accreditation is obtained.

If accreditation cannot be obtained within the period set by the Ministry, the institution can be required to refund fees collected without legal entitlement and submit an academic continuity and student protection plan for affected students.

Repeated violations can result in higher fines, rejection of applications for new programmes and further restrictions. A third repetition can ultimately lead to withdrawal of institutional licensure or accreditation, subject to measures protecting students.

Advertising an unaccredited programme can also trigger penalties

The regulation separately targets advertising and publication practices.

Universities can be penalised for misleading advertising about an institution, programme, qualification or accreditation status, including promoting unlicensed or unaccredited educational services.

The first-level fine for such advertising is Dh20,000 per advertisement, with stronger measures possible for repeated or more serious cases, including suspension of student admissions and, where the misleading information has more serious consequences, revocation of institutional or programme accreditation.

At the forum, Academic Accreditation Commission Director Prof Amjad Qandil stressed that advertising a programme before it has received accreditation can fall within the rules on false or misleading advertising.

Universities cannot materially change approved programmes without permission

Another major area covered by the regulation is deviation from an institution's approved plans.

A university that makes material changes affecting the quality of higher education, or implements material changes without the Ministry's prior approval, can face administrative measures and fines.

The regulation provides for warnings, suspension of admissions to affected programmes and corrective measures in the first instance, with substantially tougher action for repeated violations.

Academic integrity and examinations

The new framework also places institutional responsibility on universities to maintain academic integrity and the integrity of examination systems.

The regulation defines an institutional breach as serious or repeated shortcomings in the policies, procedures, monitoring, supervision, examination security or electronic examination systems needed to prevent and address cheating, research-ethics breaches or other breaches of examination integrity.

For serious breaches affecting learning outcomes or the integrity of assessment results, the penalties can escalate from warnings and suspension of admissions to rejection of new programme applications and, in repeated cases, withdrawal of institutional or programme accreditation.

The issue of artificial intelligence was prominent in Wednesday's discussion. Prof Qandil said universities should not attempt to make education“AI-resistant”, but should instead develop AI-resilient assessment, reflecting the reality that AI is now part of the education process.

Fictitious practical training is now explicitly covered

The resolution also defines and penalises fictitious practical training.

This includes formally registering a student for practical training without the actual training taking place or without the student acquiring the intended skills and knowledge, including situations where training is effectively used only to satisfy graduation requirements.

Institutions can be required to refund students, pay the cost of repeating training and, for repeated or systematic cases, face suspension of admissions, rejection of new programme applications and more severe licensing consequences.

The system encourages self-reporting

The enforcement framework also contains an important compliance incentive.

Administrative fines will not be imposed in certain circumstances where an institution self-reports a deficiency or violation before it is detected, provided the violation did not result from gross negligence or a deliberate act.

Fines can also be waived where non-compliance resulted from delays by government entities, or from force majeure, natural disasters, officially declared epidemics or general government decisions, provided there was no negligence or deliberate act by the institution.

However, the Ministry can still take measures necessary to protect students or ensure compliance even where a fine is not imposed.

Institutions have 60 days from becoming aware of a contested decision, procedure, penalty or administrative measure to submit a reasoned written grievance. The Ministry must decide on the grievance within 60 days, although submitting a grievance does not automatically suspend the disputed measure.

What this means for students

Taken together, the four resolutions shift much of the regulatory focus towards preventing problems before they affect students.

Universities must demonstrate that they are financially and operationally capable of continuing, programmes must be accredited before students are admitted, institutions must maintain accurate data and continuity plans, and serious failures can trigger measures designed specifically to protect students' studies, records and financial rights.

The Ministry's Undersecretary said the four measures were intended to work as one cycle covering the institution's journey from initial licensing through programme review, financial safeguards and enforcement.

The Ministry has also stressed that implementation is a shared responsibility between federal and local authorities and higher education institutions.

For universities, the practical message is that compliance is increasingly a continuous process rather than a licence obtained once and then maintained largely through periodic paperwork. The new framework links continued operation to institutional readiness, programme quality, data, financial sustainability, student protection, compliance and outcomes.

And for students, the stated objective is greater certainty that the institution and programme they choose are licensed and accredited, that the qualification is backed by defined learning outcomes, and that safeguards are in place should an institution or programme encounter serious difficulties.

ALSO READ

UAE universities must have 'teach-out' plans to protect students if they close UAE regulates violations, penalties for higher education institutions, training centres

MENAFN10092026000049011007ID1111649994