| Date, No. | Title |
|---|---|
| 01/07/2022 No. SP-3 |
Decision related to a violation of academic ethics in a biomedical research
(Investigated by: L. Tauginienė)
Keywords: university, biomedical research, bioethics requirements, informed consent, ethical approval |
| 17/06/2022 No. SP-2 |
Decision related to the complaint of 1 June 2020
(Investigated by: L. Tauginienė)
Keywords: research institute, affiliation, practice-oriented consultancy, applied research, expert work, social activities |
| 23/07/2021 No. SP-10 |
Decision related to violation election procedures of the governing body of higher education and research institution
(Investigated by: K. Kapočiūtė-Sabaitienė)
Keywords: university, governing body, composition of a governing body, election |
| 13/07/2021 No. SP-9 |
Decision related to ethics in research performance
(Investigated by: K. Pažusytė, K. Kapočiūtė)
Keywords: research performance, research paper, plagiarism |
| 16/06/2021 No. SP-7 |
Decision related to violations of research and professional ethics
(Investigated by: K. Pažusytė)
Keywords: final Master's paper, supervisor, student, scientific paper, co-author |
| 02/06/2021 No. SP-5 |
Decision related to the complaint of 11 November 2020
(Investigated by: K. Pažusytė)
Keywords: research data, data collection, data embezzlement, research data management, authorship |
| 04/05/2021 No. SP-3 |
Decision related to violations of transfer (approval) of academic achievements
(Investigated by: K. Pažusytė)
Keywords: transfer (approval) of part-time academic achievements, curricula, evaluation of compliance with curricula |
| 13/03/2020 No. SP-4 |
Decision related to violations of academic ethics in a doctoral dissertation
(Investigated by: K. Kapočiūtė)
Keywords: university, doctoral dissertation, dissertation-based scientific publications, citation, indication of primary sources, indication of secondary sources |
Information on the decision-making shall be published in the “Decisions” section on the Office’s website immediately after it has been made. The decision shall be published after the deadline for submitting an appeal of the decision of 30 days, and shall be posted for one year after its publication. If a decision in appealed with court in the course of legal proceedings, the decision shall not be made public, and the calculation of the one-year term shall start from the effective date of the final procedural decision of the court.
In order to ensure the protection of personal data, the published decisions of the Ombudsperson shall contain solely the information necessary to achieve the aim pursued.
(art. 34 and 35 of Recommendations for Examining and Investigating Complaints and Reports at the Initiative of the Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures) VALID UNTIL 12 JULY 2021
The depersonalised information about the decision (decision’s title, number, date of adoption, and keywords) shall be announced immediately in section “Decisions” on the Office’s website. When the appeal term of 30 days matures, the decision shall be depersonalised and downloaded not later than within 10 workdays. The depersonalised decision shall be available in section “Decisions” on the Office’s website for one year after it has been downloaded. If the decision is appealed, the depersonalised decision shall not be publicly available in the course of the proceedings, and the term of one year shall be calculated from the day when the final procedural judgment enters into effect. The decision shall be depersonalised by the investigator, who has prepared its draft, or by another employee of the Office assigned by the ombudsperson, in accordance with the Rules for the Implementation of the Rights of Data Subjects in the Office of the Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures of the Republic of Lithuania. The published depersonalised decision shall be removed if the information about its appeal is learnt after its publishing.
To ensure the protection of personal data, the published decisions of the Ombudsperson shall contain solely the information necessary to achieve the aim pursued. In order to avoid the person’s recognition, the fictitious initials of the person shall be used in the decision’s text. The precise names of institutions, units and job titles shall not be used together.
(art. 30 and 31 of Procedure of Complaints Handling and Investigations at the Initiative of the Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures) VALID FROM 13 JULY 2021
Updated: 31 March 2023
