The complaint submitted by the Political Investigations Group (GIP) related to the plagiarism of Laura Codruta Kovesi’s PhD thesis is “partially justified and substantiated” – this is one of the conclusions of the Ethics Commission of the West University of Timisoara (UVT), stated sources within the UVT leadership for PressOne.
The Ethics and Professional Deontology Commission of the West University of Timisoara found that 564 lines of Laura Codruta Kovesi’s PhD thesis, out of the 4,705 lines challenged, are similar to other sources, shows a press release issued by the higher education institution.
“After performing the comparison, there were excluded the cases in which legislative texts were identically took (according to the Art.9 letter b) of the Law no.8/1996 on the copyright, legal texts are not subject of the copyright protection) and lines found to be similar to works published after supporting the analyzed PhD thesis. Following this approach, the Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT found that 564 lines of the 4,705 lines challenged are similar to other sources. Given that the PhD thesis that is subject to the analysis has 11,512 lines, the 564 lines found to be similar to other sources, in relation to the complaint submitted to UEFISCDI, represent a similarity degree of 4.9%. In the absence of a report issued by an expert committee, the Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT assumes in this moment the similarity degree checked by its members in relation to the complaint. The Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT concludes that the complaint is unjustified for 4,141 lines of the 4,705 challenged lines, and partially justified for the rest of the lines” shows the release.
According to the quoted source, the Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT has seen all the documents provided by the authors of the complaint and by the concerned person, following all the legal procedures to analyze the mentioned complaint.
“The Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT made all the legal approaches to form a commission consisting of experts in Criminal Law, lecturers or university professors, Ph. D coordinators, who could perform the analysis of the mentioned PhD thesis in relation to the complaint. Following these approaches, the Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT found that the requirements to form a commission of experts who could analyze the PhD thesis in relation to the complaint, are not fulfilled. In these circumstances, the Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT analyzed the manner of wording the PhD thesis in relation to the complaint submitted to UEFISCDI under the no.2567/13.10.2016, checking each paragraph of the thesis which was subject of the complaint and comparing it to the sources indicated by the iThenticate software”, according to the quoted source.
At the same time, the Ethic and Professional Deontology Commission of UVT announced that it will send the answers to the involved person within the legal time limits.
The complaint submitted by GIP referred to around 4,000 lines of the total of 11,000 lines contained by the thesis entitled “Fighting against organized crime through Criminal Law provisions”, with which the DNA chief prosecutor obtained the PhD title in Law in 2011.
The deadline by which UVT had to express its position related to the plagiarism complaint submitted by GIP was November 17.
Although UVT was expected to send a recommendation to the National Council for Attesting Titles, Diplomas and University Certificates (CNATDCU), either to maintain or to withdraw the PhD title subject to the analysis, UVT Senate voted on Thursday, November 17, with an overwhelming majority, that the University will assume the future decision of the CNATDCU working committee.
The reason of this shirk – according to the PressOne sources – is that none of the experts in Law from other universities invited by UVT to be part of the commission analyzing the thesis didn’t assume this responsibility.
Thus, UVT will not propose the PhD title held by Codruta Kovesi to be maintained or withdrawn, and if the Ministry will not accept this point of view, UVT Senate will still take a decision by voting to this end.