[ad_1]
The Free University of Berlin should have withdrawn the title from Family Minister Franziska Giffey on the plagiarism issue surrounding her doctoral thesis, if the UF had adhered to the relevant standards for dealing with forgeries: this is the scientist’s conclusion Klaus Gärditz at a press conference in Berlin on Wednesday. CDU parliamentary group.
The Christian Democrats had commissioned the University of Bonn professor of public law to prepare an opinion on the internal test report of the Free University of Berlin on Giffey’s doctoral thesis. So it was not Giffey’s doctoral thesis that was examined, but the conclusion of the committee created by the FU.
The FU only reprimanded Giffey after reviewing the plagiarism allegations; his doctorate was not withdrawn, although the internal report identified “considerable deficiencies in terms of the standard of scientific work.” However, only in a narrowly defined part of the dissertation, which is why, in the opinion of the committee, the work continues to be an independent scientific achievement.
Hoaxes of the “systematic character”
Gärditz has torn apart this argument in his report which has now been presented. Gärditz explains that the committee misunderstood the legally relevant standards for evaluating hoaxes. UF itself expressly assumes that the deliberate and deliberate hoaxes found at Giffey are “systematic in nature”, but asserts that the work nonetheless contains scientifically high-quality parts. According to a fundamental judgment, this is wrong.
Because the Federal Administrative Court determined in a main ruling that systematic and planned plagiarism characterizes a thesis, regardless of whether there are still independent parts of the work that are not taxed, according to Gärditz in his report. “Otherwise, almost none of the numerous revocations of doctoral degrees, almost all confirmed by the courts, would have been possible due to plagiarism,” because dissertations without original contributions from doctoral students “are extremely rare.”
“Conspicuous summary of important legal violations”
In addition, the professor analyzes on the basis of the Berlin Higher Education Law that the means of complaint are neither foreseen nor possible and that the legality of the committee created by the FU is also questionable.
“The present case shows a conspicuous sum of important legal violations”, thus concluded Gärditz in his 26-page report, that SPIEGEL has: that it fundamentally misjudges the legally relevant standards. “
Adrian Grasse justified the fact that the CDU had commissioned an expert opinion, Spokesman for the research policy of the CDU parliamentary group, saying that the opposition should control the institutions. But that has hardly been possible for her until now. Because the FU’s internal report on the plagiarism issue was under lock and key for almost a year. It was only through a lawsuit from Asta in early October that the CDU became aware of and was able to commission the report.
Giffey wants to become mayor of Berlin
Grasse criticized the fact that the Berlin Science Administration did not intervene after the FU’s complaint last year. This sends the “fatal signal” that counterfeits are of no consequence and are damaging to Berlin’s reputation as a scientific place. Grasse demanded that the process be reopened, the expert Gärditz supported the measure.
FU Berlin could not be reached for a short-term comment on the report. The Berlin Senate Chancellery for Science and Research stated that it did not comment on reports it did not have. According to Grasse, the document will still be sent to both institutions.
For Franziska Giffey, the report and the possible resumption of the process come at an inopportune moment. She will be elected as the new state president at the Berlin SPD state party conference on Saturday. Giffey wants to become the SPD’s top candidate for the Berlin state elections in 2021 and inherit the ruling mayor Michael Müller.
