SCIENCE ETHICS
C O D E
OF THE
HUNGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
■ /82s) ■
H UNGAR I AN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
S c ie n c e E t h i c s C o d e
o f th e H u n g a r i a n A c a d e m y o f S c ie n c e s
Science E thics Code of the H ungarian Academy of Sciences
H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S cien ces B u d a p e st, 2013
T he Science E th ic s Code a n d th e M em o ran d u m w ere approved by R eso lu tio n No. 2 5 /2 0 1 0 . (V. 4.) p a s s e d by th e G e n era l A ssem bly o f HAS. The P ro ce d u re s of th e S cience E th ics C o m m ittee a s w ell a s how its d ecisio n s c a n be a p p e a le d were ap p ro v ed by R eso lu tio n s Nos. 3 4 /2 0 1 2 . (IV. 10.) a n d 5 0 /2 0 1 0 .
(X. 26.) resp ectiv ely p a s s e d by HAS’ P residency.
E d ited by László F é sű s,
C h air of HAS’ S cien ce E th ics C om m ittee
Cover a n d g ra p h ic s by a u ri g rafik a
ISBN 9 7 8 -9 6 3 -5 0 8 -6 7 7 -1
© H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S cien ces
P u b lish e d by th e H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S ciences P erso n in c h a rg e of p u b licatio n :
J ó z s e f P á lin k á s, P resid en t of HAS P rin te d by Kódex Könyvgyártó pic.
Table of C ontents
STILL M O R E CERTAINTY 7
MEMORANDUM. MORAL AND ETHICAL
QUESTIONS O F SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH 9
In tro d u c tio n 11
The a u to n o m y of sc ie n tific re s e a rc h a n d
the obligations o f r e s e a rc h e rs 12 Moral self-control o f scientific r e s e a r c h 12 D angers o f infringing u p o n science eth ic
n o rm s 14
The re s e a rc h ethic ro le o f th e H u n g a ria n
A cadem y of S c ie n c e s 16
CODE OF CONDUCT O F THE
HUNGARIAN ACADEMY O F SCIENCES 19
P ream ble 21
1. Scope o f the S c ien ce Code of C o n d u c t 22 2. F u n d a m e n ta l m o ra l a n d eth ical prin cip les
of scientific r e s e a r c h 23
3. Perform ing scien tific re se a rc h 25 4. C o m m u n icatio n o f scientific r e s u lts 28 5. Infringem ent of scien tific e th ic s 31 6. P ro ce d u re in th e c a s e of s u s p e c te d
in frin g em en ts o f e th ic a l ru les 35
•5-
PROCEDURES OF THE SCIENCE ETHICS COMMITTEE OF THE HUNGARIAN ACADEMY
O F SCIENCES 41
1. Legal S ta tu s of th e Science E th ics
C om m ittee 43
2. Scope of d u tie s a n d co m p eten c e of SEC 43 3. M em bers a n d officers of SEC 45
4. O p eratio n of SEC 46
5. P ro ced u re in in d iv id u al c a s e s 49
6. M iscellan eo u s 58
7. F inal p ro v isio n s 58
APPEALING A DECISION MADE BY THE
SCIENCE ETHICS COMMITTEE 59
6
STILL M O R E C ER TA IN TY ...
„Since e v e n previously, in an age o f material power, spiritual su p erio rity could reign suprem e,
it is more certain th a n e v e r before th a t henceforth it sh o u ld reign w ith e v e n more e a s e a n d certainty.
N ow here, therefore, sh o u ld w e sea rch fo r o ur saving grace but in o ur ow n v irtu e s a n d spiritual superiority. ”
(Istv án Széchenyi) Lying a t th e base o f c le a r th in k in g a n d c u ltu re is m oral know ledge, a k in d of know ledge th a t is tu r n e d into a sy ste m by e th ic a l scien ce in fo rm ed by v a lu e s com m only held a n d acc o m p lish e d .
R a th e r th a n a s e p a r a te d im e n sio n of scientific e n d e a v o u rs, ethics is in fact th e g e n u in e te rra in a n d legitim acy of s c ie n c e . E th ics in science is a n ord erin g principle t h a t allow s for th e h a rm o n y of scientific goals a n d a c h ie v e m e n ts w ith h um ility a n d service t h a t science o w es to N a tu re a n d m a n k in d .
T h u s, a n ethics c o d e is n o t a t all a n ach iev em en t or p ro d u c t; ra th e r, it is a g e stu re of se ttin g ru le s a n d s ta n d a rd s in the in te ra c tiv e a n d in te rd e p e n d e n t a re a w h e re re s e a rc h a n d sc ie n tist, re s e a rc h e r a n d science, know ledge a n d m a n k in d , co m m u n ity a n d N ature m eet.
A scien ce e th ic s code is also a b o u t v a lu e s held b y re s e a rc h e rs w hile doing science; it is a n ach ie v e m en t th a t c o n trib u te s h eav ily to th e v alu e- sy stem o f scientific a c h ie v e m e n ts. It w a rn s u s of th e re q u ire m e n t t h a t scientific g oals sh o u ld ta rg e t
•7-
com m o n ly held v a lu e s a n d in te r e s ts ra th e r th a n m ere com petition. It m a k e s it c le a r th a t th e n e e d s of scien tific a d v a n c e m e n t m u s t n o t h a rm th e id eal of a m o ra l know ledge. It s tre s s e s th a t only e th ic a l scien ce c a n b ase a n d sh a p e th e im p ro v em en t of p u b lic life by re p re se n tin g p u b lic in te re sts a n d u n d e rta k in g th e fu tu re in a re sp o n sib le way.
W ith th e Science E th ic s Code o f th e H u n g a ria n A cadem y o f Sciences we w ish to c re a te a forum for p re serv in g scientific in d e p e n d e n c e , integrity, a n d a u th e n tic ity : it is a p o in t of referen ce, a re p o sito ry of s ta n d a r d s th a t c a n serve as a p o in t of d e p a rtu re ste e rin g s c ie n tis ts in th e co rrect d irectio n ; its s p irit c a n m a k e s u re th a t re s e a rc h objectives s h o u ld p reserv e r a t h e r th a n d e stro y th e m a n y v alu es t h a t a re eq u ally valid in h u m a n scien ce a n d cu ltu re.
It striv e s to provide a b a s e for ev alu a tio n , a w eight to d e cisio n s, a n d m u c h legitim acy to u n d e rta k in g s.
Yet, it is n o t a t all a m e re co m p en d iu m of ru le s;
ra th e r, it is th e e x p re ssio n of th e m in d s e t of doing a m o ral a n d e th ic a l k in d o f science.
Its significance, th erefo re, m u s t n o t be m e a s u re d by its m e re com ing in to being b u t m u c h r a th e r by its p ro sp ectiv e m o d el-m ak in g p o w er th a t c a n s h a p e th e m a n y k in d re d in te n tio n s , e n d ea v o u rs, a n d c o m m itm e n ts of m a n y o th e r in s titu tio n s w h ere scien ce is d o n e.
B u d a p e s t, 22 N ovem ber 2 0 1 0
Jó z se f P á lin k á s P re sid e n t
H u n g a ria n A cadem y of Sciences
♦8*
MEMORANDUM
MORAL AND ETHICAL QUESTIONS OF
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
Introduction
T he m o tiv atio n al pow er o f scientific re s e a rc h is a n a tu r a l h u m a n th ir s t for u n d e rs ta n d in g , a d esire for u n d e rs ta n d in g th e p h y sica l, biological, a n d social w orld, th e h u m a n m in d a n d its p ro d u c ts. Science itse lf is sy ste m a tiz ed know ledge w hich we acq u ire th ro u g h o b serv atio n s, e x p erim en tatio n , d isq u isitio n , a n d opinions. T he aim of scientific re s e a rc h is th e cognition of n a tu r e a n d th e fu n d a m e n ta l prin cip les o f th e object o r p h e n o m e n o n stu d ied , a n d to m ake th e re se a rc h re s u lts p u b lic.
Scientific re s e a rc h is exceptionally d iv erg en t a n d v aried a n d c a n n o t be d e sc rib e d by a single fa c tu al or norm ative definition. A lth o u g h reg ard in g th e ir m e th o d s a n d tra d itio n s k in d s o f scientific re s e a rc h m ay differ from o ne a n o th e r, it is th e distin ctiv e m a rk of all scientific re s e a rc h to b e b a se d on evidence a n d to be fou n d ed on th e o b se rv a tio n of th e p ro d u c ts of n a tu re or h u m a n activity a n d its re su lts.
Scientific re s e a rc h is a n activity c arrie d o u t by in dividuals n o t in iso latio n b u t in synergy o r co -o p era
tio n w ith o th e r re s e a rc h e rs . In its m ode o f re a so n in g a n d p ro c e sses, science is n o t tied to n a tio n a l b o rd ers. The scientific c o m m u n ity d e te rm in e s th e p ro p e r m ethodology of re s e a rc h a n d co n firm s its re su lts. It follows th a t scien tific re s e a rc h is able to c o n trib u te to h u m a n know ledge if its r e s u lts becom e available to o th e rs a s well so th a t its v a lu e of tr u t h c a n be ju d g e d w ith a h ig h degree of c ertain ty .
T he d o c u m e n t w a s a d o p te d by th e H u n g a ria n A cad em y of S ciences w ith its re s o lu tio n No. 2 5 /2 0 1 0 . (V. 4.)
•11«
The autonomy o f scientific research and the obligations o f researchers
Scientific re s e a rc h sh a ll be in d e p e n d e n t, u n b ia se d , a n d a u to n o m o u s. The re a lisa tio n of th is is often h a m p e re d o r even p rev en ted by s tro n g p e rso n a litie s or in s titu tio n s , political p re s s u re , eco n o m ic or fin an cial in te re st. The r e s e a rc h e r sh all h a v e th e freedom n e ed e d to keep to th e ru le s a n d c rite ria fo rm u lated by h im /h e rs e lf, serv in g th e cognition of reality a n d k eep in g p u b lic w elfare in m ind.
However, it m u s t be se e n clearly th a t th e re s e a rc h e r sh a ll fulfill h i s / h e r ta s k in o rd e r to p ro d u c e value:
h i s / h e r p re s u m p tio n s , s ta r tin g p o in ts of re s e a rc h , th e selectio n of th e re s e a rc h object, th e m e th o d of collecting d a ta , a n d th e effect of its r e s u lts a n d discoveries on society a re c o n n e c te d to th e m oral, eth ical a n d social re la tio n s in th e m id st of w h ich scien ce is proceeding.
The in s titu tio n s of H u n g a ria n science a sp ire to o p erate in a w ay u n q u e stio n a b le in b o th legal a n d m o ral term s. T herefore it is d e m a n d e d of all p e rso n s p u rs u in g scien ce to com ply w ith effective law s a n d reg u latio n s, to u n c o n d itio n a lly re sp ec t h u m a n dignity a n d fu n d a m e n ta l freedom s, a n d to c a rry ou t p ro p e r w ork of a high level of p ro fessio n al skills.
Moral self-control o f scientific research
The eth ical a n d social re la tio n sh ip of science e m p h a sise s th e resp o n sib ility of th e p e rso n p u r s u in g science. R elating to th is, a d istin c tio n sh all be m ad e
•12*
betw een q u e stio n s d e a lin g w ith th e re la tio n s h ip of science to society, a n d th o s e affecting th e m oral ru le s of scientific r e s e a r c h . However, no s h a rp b o rd erlin e c a n be d ra w n u p b etw een th e se two k in d s of q u e stio n s: so m e of th e form s o f violation of b e h a v io u r n o rm s re la tin g to r e s e a rc h w ork c a n c a u s e s e rio u s h a rm to o u r fellow -beings e n d a n g e rin g th e ir h e a lth o r welfare, th e re fo re m erely p ro c e d u ral violations c a n be im m o ra l in a w ider s e n s e as well.
D u rin g o u r e x a m in a tio n of scien ce in its w ider eth ical a n d social c o n n e c tio n s , n u m e r o u s eth ical q u e stio n s o c c u r like:
• R eg ard in g th e o b je c t to be discovered: is it a t all w o rth being d isco v ered ?
• W h at can be th e c o n se q u e n c e s o f th e re s u lts of re s e a rc h to th e ind iv id u al p e rs o n or society?
• C an re se a rc h b e re stric te d o n a n ethical o r so cia l base; c a n scien ce be forced to self- d iscip lin e if a s a r e s u lt of its activ ities it c a n c a u s e h a rm to people, c an h a v e h a rm fu l effects on th e f a u n a , society, o r n a tu re ?
• W h a t is to be d o n e if th e c o n se q u e n c e s of re s e a rc h conflict w ith h u m a n v a lu e s (dignity, au to n o m y , freed o m , equality, p ro h ib itio n of exploitation); o r in d e e d if it s e e m s p ro b ab le t h a t th e re s u lt o f scientific re s e a rc h can be u s e d a g ain st m a n k in d ?
• C a n re se a rc h re m a in sufficiently in d e p e n d e n t of g ro u p in te r e s ts , does th e d an g er n o t e x ist th a t th e re s e a rc h p la ce becom es too d e p e n d e n t o n th e influence o f sp o n so rs?
• Is th e r e s e a r c h e r able to re fra in from a selective u s e a n d m is in te rp re ta tio n of h i s /
•13*
h e r re s e a rc h re s u lts, a n d c a n h e / s h e sto p a n u n a c c e p ta b le u tilis a tio n of h i s / h e r discoveries.
R eg ard in g th e e th ic a l self-discipline of scien tific re s e a rc h we m u s t first deal w ith th e eth ical n o rm s to be a d h e re d to d u rin g th e fu lfilm en t of re s e a rc h w ork. E x ten d e d a d m in istra tiv e d u tie s, a la c k of tim e, fin an cial a u s te rity , te n s io n s g e n e ra te d by co m p etitio n , h u m a n frailty a n d so cial c h a n g e s a re all fa c to rs ra isin g th e te m p ta tio n for th e re s e a rc h e r to achieve fast scien tific s u c c e s s by q u e stio n a b le a n d u n a c c e p ta b le m e a n s , or to try to gain m o re a tte n tio n to h im /h e r s e lf th a n d eserv ed . T h erefo re it is n e c e s sa ry th a t ru le s laid d o w n in a co d e of c o n d u c t d elim it s u c h a tte m p ts so th a t scien tific re s e a rc h re m a in s m o ra l a n d a u th e n tic .
Dangers o f infringing upon science ethic norms
The r e s e a rc h e r ’s b e h a v io u r going a g a in st sc ie n c e eth ics is h a rm fu l to scie n c e itself a s it can give false g u id elin es to o th e r re s e a rc h e r s a n d so it can r e s u lt in a c o n tin u o u s m is re p re se n ta tio n . If for ex am p le u n d e r th e p re s s u re of co m p etitio n a n in flu en tia l m a n ag in g re s e a rc h e r p re s e n ts a s ta te m e n t of d o ctrin e w h ich is d isp ro v en by th e p ro fessio n , b u t th e a u th o r of th e false s ta te m e n t c o n tin u e s to m a in ta in a n d p ro p a g a te it, th is c a n set b a c k for long y e a rs th e d ev elo p m en t of th e re se a rc h a r e a co n cern ed .
B eh av io u r infringing u p o n scie n c e ethic c a n be h a rm fu l to society a s well: false re s e a r c h m ay r e s u lt
•14.
in e.g. th e co m m ercial m a rk e tin g o f h a z a rd o u s m ed icin es o r o th e r in d u s tr ia l p ro d u c ts . F u rth er, if science policy or leg islatio n is b a s e d on false re s e a rc h r e s u lts , th e h a rm fu l c o n se q u e n c e s are u n fo resee a b le.
It c an also h av e a h a rm fu l effect if th e tr u s t of th e pu b lic in scie n c e is s h a k e n even th o u g h science s h a ll alw ays b e a reliab le so u rce of o rie n ta tio n to w a rd s a n d p re p a ra tio n for decision m a k in g .
Finally, b e h a v io u r in frin g in g u p o n scie n c e ethic c a n also be h a rm fu l to th e re s e a rc h e r h im /h e r s e lf sin ce so o n er o r la te r h e / s h e will be re je c te d by th e re s e a rc h e r c o m m u n ity .
In all, b e h a v io u r in frin g in g u p o n scie n c e ethic is sp read in g . T h e p u b lic a tio n p re s s u re c a u s e d by a n ex p an sio n o f science m e tric s , v a rio u s e v alu atio n te c h n iq u e s, p ra c tic e s a n d q u a n tifie d sy stem s re g u la tin g th e c a re e rs o f sc ie n tists, th e b u s in e s s s p h e re , th e ev er h a rd e r co m p etitio n for re so u rce s, th e p o ssib ilities provided by th e in te r n e t all c o n trib u te to th is re g re tta b le p h e n o m en o n . Offence to re s e a rc h e th ic s m ay be ju d g e d e ith er a s a n ethical o r a s a legal in frin g em en t. E th ical m isc o n d u c t t h a t c a n n o t be a d ju d g ed a n d p u n is h e d w ith legal in s tru m e n ts , b u t only on a m o ral a n d e th ic a l base.
In frin g e m en ts c a n be a d ju d g e d a n d p u n is h e d by in s tru m e n ts of law. The fo rm of m oral p u n is h m e n t is publicity. T h e re is often n o s h a rp b o rd e r betw een a severe e th ic a l m is c o n d u c t a n d a legal offence, in s u c h cases th e c a te g o risa tio n of th e m is c o n d u c t is n o t a n easy ta s k .
•15-
The research ethic role o f the Hungarian Academ y o f Sciences
B ase d on its s ta tu to r y obligation, th e H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S cien ces ta k e s re sp o n sib ility for th e p re se rv a tio n of th e m orality a n d a u th e n tic ity of H u n g a ria n scientific re se a rc h . P u r s u a n t th e re to it
• c re a te s a n d c o n tin u o u s ly m a in ta in s its Code of C o n d u c t a n d o p e ra te s its Science E th ics C om m ittee;
• w ish es th a t all p e rs o n s p a rtic ip a tin g in th e so lu tio n of hom e a n d / o r in te rn a tio n a l scientific ta s k s w ith th e ir scientific activity com m it th e m selv e s to com ply w ith th e Code of C o n d u ct by a d h e rin g to it;
• c o n sid e rs it p ro m in en tly im p o rta n t th a t th e le a d e rs of in s titu tio n s a n d in s titu te s sh o u ld be in th e ir p e rs o n s co m m itted to a n ex em p lary p re se rv a tio n a n d s tre n g th e n in g of th e in teg rity of science;
• calls on all re s e a rc h o rg a n isa tio n s o p e ra tin g in H u n g a ry to se t u p re s e a rc h e th ic s bodies w h ich sh a ll g u a rd over th e integrity o f scien ce re s e a rc h on th e b a sis of th is Science E thic Code or th e ir ow n scien ce eth ical ru le s .;
• re g a rd s a s a fu n d a m e n ta l re q u ire m e n t th e all-tim e o b serv an ce of H u n g a ria n legal re g u la tio n s a n d in te rn a tio n a l ru le s re la tin g to h u m a n re s e a rc h a n d a n im a l te sts;
• re g a rd s it c ru c ia l th a t in th e se c o n d a ry a n d te rtia ry e d u c a tio n a n d esp ecially in d o cto ral tra in in g scien ce ethic know ledge,
•16*
a n d p rin cip les a n d p ra c tice s to be followed s h o u ld be c o n tin u o u s ly ta u g h t a n d le arn ed ;
• a u th o ris e s its Science E th ic s C o m m ittee to proceed u p o n re q u e st in all c ase s t h a t in ju re or e n d a n g e r th e in te g rity of scientific re s e a rc h or r a is e a su sp ic io n of a scie n c e e th ic a l m isc o n d u c t. In th is role th e S cien ce E th ic s C om m ittee c a n also a c t a s a fo ru m of a p p e a l in c a se s d ecid ed by th e science e th ic co m m ittees o f re s e a rc h in s titu te s , h ig h e r e d u c a tio n , or o th e r in s titu tio n s a n d o rg a n is a tio n s.
B u d a p e st, 4 May 2 0 1 0
G e n e ra l A ssem bly
of th e H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S cien ces
•17*
CODE OF CONDUCT OF THE
HUNGARIAN ACADEMY
OF SCIENCES
PREAMBLE
B ased on p o in t g) of p a r a g r a p h (1) of a rtic le 3 of th e Act XL of 1994 o n th e H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S cien ces (HASL) (“g u a rd s over t h e clarity of p u b lic life, th e freedom o f scientific r e s e a rc h a n d a rtic u la tio n of scientific opin io n s”), fu rth e r, in lin e w ith s u c h in te n tio n s a risin g in in te r n a tio n a l scientific life th e p re se n t C ode of C o n d u ct d e te rm in e s th e m oral a n d fu n d a m e n ta l ethical p rin c ip le s th a t th o s e carry in g o u t scientific re se a rc h s h a l l ad h ere to , d escrib es th e re c o m m en d e d p ro c e d u re s a n d ru le s re la tin g to th e c arry in g -o u t of scientific re s e a rc h a n d p re s e n ts th e c a se s a n d m o d i o p e ra n d i in case of w h ic h re s e a rc h eth ic is infringed. F u r t h e r it aim s a t c o n tin u o u sly rem in d in g re s e a rc h e rs, in s titu tio n s dealing w ith re se a rc h a n d o rg a n is a tio n s su p p o rtin g re se a rc h of th e ir resp o n sib ility for t h e m a in te n a n c e of in teg rity a n d a u th e n tic ity in s c ie n tific re s e a rc h .
The scie n c e ethic p rin c ip le s a n d th e p ro h ib itio n of th e in frin g em en t th e r e o f are fu n d a m e n ta l a n d u n iv e rsal r u le s th a t c a n b e derived fro m u n iv e rsa l m o ral p rin c ip le s. T h erefo re, th e fo rm er have b e e n in c o rp o ra te d into th e C o d e of C o n d u c t w ith o u t d iscip lin ary , c u ltu ra l, o r reg io n al co m p ro m ises.
The C ode of C o n d u ct is n o t a law, n o r is it a legal n o rm , b u t is th e m e an s o f th e m oral self-reg u latio n of th e scientific c o m m u n ity . It is a fu n d a m e n ta l re sp o n sib ility of those p u r s u in g scie n c e to fo rm u late
T h e d o cu m en t w a s adopted by t h e G e n e ra l A ssem bly of th e H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S c ie n c e s w ith its r e s o lu tio n No. 2 5 /2 0 1 0 . (V. 4.)
•21*
th e fu n d a m e n ta l p rin c ip le s re la tin g to m o rally s o u n d re s e a rc h w ork, d e te rm in e th e c rite ria of a cc e p tab le re s e a rc h e r c o n d u ct, a n d to a c t in c a s e s w h en th e re is a d a n g e r of a n in frin g em en t of th e fu n d a m e n ta l m oral p rin c ip le s of scientific re s e a rc h , a n d th e s u sp ic io n of a n eth ical offence occurs.
D u rin g th e p re p a ra tio n of th e Science C ode of C o n d u c t th e „Code of C o n d u c t for Scientific In teg rity ” re c o m m e n d a tio n s of th e E u ro p e a n S ci
ence F o u n d a tio n a n d th e All E u ro p e a n A cad em ies1 2 e la b o ra te d on th e b a s is of sev eral p re c ed in g d o c u m e n ts in 200 9 serv ed a s a s ta r tin g po in t
1. Scope o f the Science Code o f Conduct
The sco p e of th e S cien ce Code o f C o n d u ct s h a ll co m p u lso rily cover all pu b lic b o d y m e m b e rs of th e H u n g a ria n A cadem y of S cien ces (HAS) a s well a s th o s e em ployed in its re s e a rc h in s titu te s , th e re s e a rc h e r s of r e s e a rc h g ro u p s su p p o rte d by HAS, th o s e a w ard e d Bolyai J á n o s fellow ships, th e p ro c e d u re itse lf for o b ta in in g th is fellow ship a n d all p e rso n s p a rtic ip a tin g th e re in , th e p e rs o n s p a rtic ip a tin g in te n d e r s called for by HAS, th e p ro c e d u re s c o n d u c te d by th e Scientific E th ic s C om m ittee of HAS, fu rth e rm o re , th e p ro c e d u re for o b ta in in g th e title D o cto r of HAS a n d all p e rs o n s p a rtic ip a tin g th e re in , a n d th e p e rs o n s rew ard ed by HAS for th e ir p ro fessio n al w ork (h erein after re fe rre d
1 http: / / www.mta.hu/index.php?id=1043 2 http://www.allea.org
•22*
to a s: scien tific re se a rc h e rs). In a d d itio n , HAS s u g g e s ts th a t a ll o th e r in s titu te s a n d o rg a n is a tio n s p u rs u in g sc ie n c e sh o u ld re g a rd it as th e ir d u ty to ap p ly th e p r e s e n t code of c o n d u c t. While ta k in g into c o n sid e ra tio n th e Science C ode of C o n d u ct o f HAS, p a rtic u la r scie n tific an d e d u c a tio n a l in s titu te s m ay, p re p a re th e ir o w n codes of c o n d u c t a s well.
2. Fundam ental moral and ethical principles o f scientific research
The m o st im p o r ta n t m o ra l ru le s of scientific re s e a rc h th a t scien tific re s e a rc h e r s sh o u ld c o n sid e r obligatory for th e m se lv e s a n d w h ich th ey m u s t s ta n d for c a n be d e sc rib e d by th e following co n ce p ts:
2.1 . H o n e sty in p re s e n tin g scientific g o als a n d re s e a rc h in te n tio n s , a p re c ise p re s e n ta tio n of scientific m e th o d s , p ro c e d u re s a n d in te rp re ta tio n s , a n d h o n e sty a ls o in explaining p o ssib ilities, d a n g e rs a n d ju stifia b le claim s in h e r e n t in th e p o ssib le a p p lic atio n of r e s u lts .
2.2 . Reliability in perfo rm in g re se a rc h , reco rd in g , sto rin g an d p r e s e n tin g d a ta. E lim in atin g negligence a n d in a tte n tio n . F u ll re p o rtin g on th e a c c o m p lis h m e n ts a n d r e s u lts of previous re sea rc h .
2.3 . O bjectivity: in te rp re ta tio n s a n d c o n c lu sio n s m u s t be exclusively fo u n d ed o n facts or im p a rtia l 3
3 The Anglo-Saxon literature often uses the expression „scientific integrity".
As the translation of science integrity is not a generally accepted term in the Hungarian language, we only use it sparsely in this document.
•23-
a n d logical p ro o f a n d on d a ta th e c o rre c tn e s s of w h ic h c a n be verified a t le a s t o n a th e o re tic a l level.
2.4. Im partiality a n d in d e p en d e n c e from any in te re ste d p a rty o r gro u p in te re s t, from ideological o r political p r e s s u r e g ro u p s, a n d from eco n o m ic or fin an cial in flu en ce.
2.5. O p e n n e ss in d is c u s s in g th e re s u lts w ith o th er re s e a rc h e rs a n d c o n trib u tin g to th e a u g m e n tin g of pu b lic know ledge th ro u g h th e p u b lic a tio n of re s u lts . O p e n n e s s p re s u p p o s e s the p u b lic ity an d accessib ility of th e d a ta s u p p o rtin g th e re su lts p u b lis h e d in th e scientific c o m m u n ic a tio n for all in te re ste d re s e a rc h e r s a n d th e g en eral p u b lic. In re a so n a b le c a s e s th is fu n d a m e n ta l p rin c ip le m ay b e re stric te d by sp ecial c o n sid e ra tio n s a ris in g from th e n a tu re of re s e a rc h (in tellectu al p ro p e rty rig h ts, p ro te c tio n of p e rso n a lity rig h ts etc.). O p e n n e s s is also re stric te d d u rin g ongoing re se a rc h .
2.6. D uty of care for p a rtic ip a n ts in a n d th e s u b je c ts of re s e a rc h , be th e y h u m a n beings, e x p erim en tal a n im a ls, th e en v iro n m e n t, o r c u ltu ra l objects. R e se a rc h on h u m a n s u b je c ts a n d a n im als sh o u ld alw ays re s t on re s p e c t a n d d u ty of care, p ro c e d u re s m o stly s tip u la te d in law s a s well..
2.7. C a ndour in p re s e n tin g th e w o rk of o th ers a n d providing referen ces. T he p ro fessio n al integrity o f re s e a rc h e r colleagues s h a ll be re s p e c te d , th e ir re s u lts tre a te d w ith h o n e sty .
2.8. R esp o n sib ility for f u tu r e science g e n eratio n s.
T he c o n tro l a n d e d u c a tio n of y o u n g s c ie n tists
•24*
re q u ire s special a tte n tio n a n d th e m e d ia tio n a n d in c re a s e d respect o f eth ical n o rm s .
2.9. D isin terested a n d im p a rtia l p a rtic ip a tio n in scientific public life: in review ing p ro c e d u re s a n d in th e w o rk of scientific bodies a n d com m ittees.
3. Performing scientific research
3 .1 . Plannin g t h e resea rch program m e
3.1.1. Defining th e goals o f research
The validity o f th e p rin c ip le of freed o m of scientific re sea rc h s h a ll not m e a n th a t th e p la n n in g of th e p a rtic u la r r e s e a r c h p ro g ram m e h a s no lim its.
S u c h re stric tio n s m a y arise esp ecially in th e c a s e of q u e stio n a b le r e s e a rc h goals a n d m e th o d s, o r in d e ed if th e re s e a rc h p la n n e d m ay e n d a n g e r or in ju re th e in d iv id u al, society, o r th e en v iro n m en t.
3.1.2. Morality a n d quality o f research
The m orality a n d q u a lity of re s e a rc h p re s u p p o s e s self-critical an d e th ic a l ju d g m e n t on th e p a r t of b o th th e re s e a rc h e r a n d th e scientific p u b lic.
It is especially im p o r ta n t t h a t u n re a listic goals sh o u ld n o t be co n ceiv ed of a s re se a rc h to p ics, a n d th e re s e a rc h e r s h o u ld n o t a ro u s e u n fo u n d e d e x p ec ta tio n s. It is n e c e s s a ry to p o n d e r th e o rig in ality of th e problem a ris in g , th e p re lim in a ry d a ta , th e n e c e s sa ry finances a n d o th er c irc u m s ta n c e s . The re s e a rc h sh o u ld n o t b e d e te rm in e d by a n effort to p ro d u c e fa st re su lts o r th e la rg e st possible n u m b e r of p u b licatio n s.
•25*
3.1.3. D ocum entation o f th e research p la n
The re s e a rc h p la n sh a ll b e reco rd ed in a form s tip u la te d by th e fin an cer o f th e re se a rc h . G enerally, th e re s e a rc h p la n in c lu d e s w ho is re sp o n sib le for th e re s e a rc h p ro g ram m e, w h a t is th e role of th e p a rtic ip a n ts , w h a t is th e form a n d re so u rc e of th e fin an cin g of th e re s e a rc h , a n d ho w d a ta a n d ex p erim en tal o b serv atio n s s h a ll be p ro c e ssed .
3.1.4. Clarification a n d recording o f incom patibility S u p p o rte rs of th e re s e a rc h a n d e x te rn a l fin an cers sh a ll a cc e p t th a t th e re s e a rc h e r p erfo rm s his or h e r w ork w ith o u t being in flu en ced . However, if by a n y special re a s o n th e re s e a rc h is in flu en ced , it m u s t be clearly sta te d u n d e r w h at c irc u m sta n c e s a n d to w h ich ex ten t th is is o c c u rrin g w h eth er d u rin g p la n n in g , perform ing, o r in th e c o u rs e of th e review ing a n d p u b lish in g of d a ta . S u c h a g reem en ts sh a ll be p relim in arily co n clu d e d in w ritin g a n d m ade available for th e m a n a g e m e n t or eth ics com m ittee of th e respective in s titu te o r o rg a n isatio n .
The p e rs o n s p a rtic ip a tin g in th e re se a rc h p ro g ram m e s h a ll clarify to co m p eten t a u th o ritie s a n d th o se en title d to s u c h clarification th e ir financial or o th e r co m m itm en ts, in c a s e th is m a y in an y form c o n stitu te in co m p atib ility d u rin g th e re se a rc h .
P erso n al in te re s t or p a rtia lity m u s t n o t influence th e re se a rc h , its objectivity, findings, o r pu b licatio n .
3.1.5. C onsidering p a te n ts
In c a se s w h ere th e p o ssib ility or c o n sid e ra tio n of p a te n t a p p lic a tio n a rises, n e c e s sa ry rig h ts a n d obli
*26*
g a tio n s sh all b e clarified in tim e, in a n ag re em e n t c o n clu d e d b e tw e e n p a rtic ip a tin g p e rs o n s a n d in s ti
tu te s a n d th e s u p p o rte rs o f th e re se a rc h , preferably in a w ritten form .
3 .2 . F u lfilm en t o f th e r e se a r c h program m e 3.2.1. D ocum entation o f d a ta and o th er research
m aterials
In th e c ase o f scien ces perfo rm in g e x p erim en ts a n d o b serv atio n s, - d a t a sh all b e a cc u ra te ly d o c u m e n te d so th a t th e r e s e a r c h can b e controlled.
D a ta a n d o th e r d o c u m e n ta tio n m a te ria ls p ro d u ced d u rin g th e re s e a rc h , b o th th o se c o n ta in e d in e lectro n ic d a ta storage d ev ices a n d h a r d copies s h a ll be sto re d in a way t h a t th e d a m ag e , loss or m a n ip u la tio n th e re o f c a n n o t occur. In c a s e loss of d a ta o ccu rs, it m u s t be d o c u m e n te d sep a ra te ly .
Following th e clo su re o f th e re se a rc h p ro g ram m e th e p ro g ram m e le a d e r m u s t s e e th a t afte r th e com ple
tio n o f th e p ro g ram m e th e d a t a a n d d o c u m e n ta tio n m a te ria ls are s to re d for a tim e com m only accep ted in h i s / h e r resp ectiv e a r e a o f science a n d th e ir p ro te c tio n a n d p re se rv a tio n is secu red .
3.2.2. H a n d o ver o f the inform ation relating to the resea rch p ro g ra m m e
W ithin th e re s e a rc h w o rk in g g ro u p th e free c irc u la tio n of in fo rm atio n re la tin g to th e re se a rc h sh a ll be e n s u re d . D u rin g th e e x ecu tio n of th e re s e a rc h prog ra m m e all p a rtic ip a n ts s h a ll be aw are of w h a t can be revealed on th e re se a rc h to p erso n s o u ts id e th e re s e a rc h .
•2 7»
Following th e a c c o m p lish m e n t of th e re s e a rc h p ro g ram m e, d a ta a n d o th e r d o c u m e n ta tio n m a te ria ls n e c e s s a ry for th e d a ta to be co n tro llab le o r re p e a ta b le o r for th e p ro g ram m e to be c o n tin u e d m u s t be m a d e av ailab le for s u c h p u rp o se s.
4. Communication o f scientific results
T he p rim ary fo ru m th e re s e a rc h e r re p o rts on h is o r h e r r e s u lts a n d p u b lis h e s th e m s h a ll be a scientific c o m m u n ic a tio n (publication) w ith th e form a ccep ted in th e resp ectiv e a re a of scie n c e an d p ro d u c e d on th e b a s is of in d e p e n d e n t p ro fessio n al review p ro ced u re.
4 .1 . S c ie n tific p u b lic a tio n s
A scientific c o m m u n ic a tio n m u s t be p u b lis h e d in a reco g n ised perio d ical o r bo o k in p rin tin g or electro n ically a n d h av in g a n in d e p e n d e n t ed ito rial com m ittee. P rio r to th e p u b lic a tio n , th e scientific re s u lt m ay be p laced in a n in te rn a tio n a lly know n archive, b u t th is c a n n o t be deem ed a scientific co m m u n ic atio n . In d ic a tin g a n o n -scien tific w ork (inform ative a rticle, c o m m u n ic a tio n n o t p u b lis h e d in a p ro fessio n al is su e , e d u c a tio n a l e x c e rp t etc.) a s scientific c o m m u n ic a tio n c o n s titu te s a n eth ical m isc o n d u ct.
4 .2 . E n tir e ty and im p a rtia lity
R esu lts sh a ll be p u b lis h e d im p artially a n d in th eir en tirety . In th e c o m m u n ic a tio n th e d e sc rip tio n of m e th o d s a p p lie d in e x p erim en ts a n d ex am in atio n s, a n d th e ir p ro p e r lite ra tu re refe re n ce s sh all b e given,
•28-
th e fau lt o f th e e x p e rim e n ta l d a ta a n d the lim its of ap p lied m ethods s h a ll also be c o m m u n ic a te d . In th e c o m m u n ic a tio n a tte n tio n s h a ll be called to th e d a n g e rs o c c u rrin g d u rin g th e e x p erim en ts.
A rbitrary selectio n of d a t a c a n n o t b e to lerated a n d re s u lts n o t in a c c o rd a n c e w ith th e co n clu sio n s c a n n o t be w ithheld.
4 .3 . P roper q u o ta tio n
The q u o ta tio n of th e w id e s t p o ssib le range of s u b s ta n tia l p re c e d e n ts of th e re se a rc h a n d th e p o ssib le all-in clu siv e q u o ta tio n of scientific p u b lic a tio n s c o n tain in g d isp u te d q u e s tio n s m u s t be a tte m p te d . If one e x p ro p ria te s o t h e r s ’ ideas, m e th o d s or d a ta to him - or h e rs e lf th ro u g h in co m p lete q u o ta tio n , h e or sh e co m m its a n eth ical m isc o n d u c t.
4 .4 . A u th o r o f the c o m m u n ic a tio n 4.4.1.
The p e rso n who, d u e to his or h e r scientific w ork, h a s given a n im p o rtan t c o n trib u tio n to th e p la n n in g or accom plishm ent of ex p erim en ts, th e evaluation a n d control o f results s h a ll be in d icated as a u th o r.
A position h e ld in th e in s titu tio n o r in stitu te, o r a role played in the fin a n c in g of th e re se a rc h sh all in itself no t e n title anyone to pose as th e a u th o r of th e publication. Nor can h o n o ra ry a u th o rs h ip be allowed.
4.4.2.
In th e c a se of se v e ra l a u th o r s a n d th e p re s e n ta tio n of the r e s u lts of s u b s ta n tia lly differing e x p erim en tal p ro cesses t h e p a rtic u la r c o n trib u tio n s of th e in d iv id u a l a u th o r s m u s t be m a d e obvious.
-29-
4.4.3.
The in d ic a tio n c o rre sp o n d in g a u th o r m ay only be u s e d by th e c o n se n t of th e o th e r a u th o r s . Only th o s e w ho have p lay ed a decisive or co -o rd in atin g role in th e c o m m u n ic atio n m ay be in d icated a s such.
4.4.4.
It is n o t p ro p er p ra c tic e to c o m m u n ic a te a p a rtic u la r e x p e rim e n ta l re s u lt in sev e ra l s e p a ra te p u b lic a tio n s for th e p u rp o s e of a u g m e n tin g th e n u m b e r of artic le s p u b lis h e d by th e re se a rc h e r.
C ases w h ere th e o rig in al article w a s w ritten in a foreign la n g u a g e sh all b e excepted. In su c h c a s e s , w hile in full deference to copyrights, p u b lic a tio n of th e H u n g a ria n lan g u ag e versio n is d e sirab le for th e p u rp o se of th e av ailab ility of th e re s e a rc h r e s u lts to w ider H u n g a ria n p ro fessio n al circles a n d for th e care o f a n H u n g a ria n scien tific-p ro fessio n al lan g u ag e term inology. The p ra c tic e of a f te r p u b lic a tio n a ccep ted in c e rta in p ro fessio n al a r e a s m ay also b e a n exception.
4 .5 . C o rrectio n
In case d u rin g th e re s e a rc h w ork it em erges t h a t so m eo n e’s ow n d a ta o r co n clu sio n p u b lish e d p re v i
ously a re fa u lty or w rong, th e a u th o r s sh all p u b lis h th is fact w ith o u t delay, preferably in th e p erio d ical th a t h a d c a rrie d th e original a rtic le in th e first in sta n c e . In th e c ase of a p u b lic a tio n of sev e ra l a u th o rs th e initi a tio n of th e co rre ctio n is th e obligation o f th e first a u th o r. D u rin g a co rrectio n , especially w h e n in d ic a tin g th e n a m e of the a u th o r s it m u s t b e avoided t h a t anyone is u n re a so n a b ly
• 30-
a c c u s e d w ith scien tific e th ic a l m isc o n d u c t. In case th e co rrectin g c o m m u n ic a tio n does n o t in d icate a n y o f th e a u th o r s of th e o rig in al c o m m u n ic atio n , th e re a so n m u s t b e explained.
5. Infringement o f scientific ethics
5 .1 . G rievous form s o f in frin g em en t o f research e th ic a l n o r m s
The m o st grievous form s of th e infringem ent of sci
entific ethics are fabrication, falsification, plagiarism , a n d bringing p e rso n a l influence to b e ar. These offences are very close to violations of th e law a n d it c a n only be decided while con sid erin g th e p a rtic u la r offence w h eth er it re a ch e s b eyond ethical m isc o n d u ct a n d h en ce m u s t be tre a ted a s a violation of law.
5.1.1.
F a b ric a tio n is th e p u b lic a tio n of “r e s u lts ” w ith o u t a n y b a se .
5.1.2.
Falsification is th e m a n ip u la tio n , a lte ra tio n , or d e lib e ra te neglect o f d a ta or re s u lts . P u b lica tio n of falsified d a ta also q u alifies a s a n e th ic al m isc o n d u c t.
5.1.3.
Plagiarism is th e takeover of ideas, scientific re
s u lts , w ords, te x ts of others a n d in d icatin g them a s o n e ’s own. A m ong grievous offences plagiarism c a n b e cau g h t o u t m o st easily. Namely, scientific c o m m u n icatio n s a n d new id e as a n d illustrative m a te ria ls occurring th erein a re protected by copy
rig h t enforceable in court. However, this pro tectio n
•31*
is n o t all-inclusive, all th e above can becom e the su b jec ts of p lag iarism w ith o u t a violation of law being clear. In s u c h c a s e s ethical ru le s c a n serve a s a b asis of orientation a n d provide p ro tectio n for th e au th o r.
Plagiarism is first of all d e ro g a to ry for th e re s e a r
c h e r a n d n o t so m u c h for scie n c e itself. However, o p e n n e s s is o n e of th e e th ic a l fu n d a m e n ta l p rin cip les of scien tific re s e a rc h , acco rd in g to w hich th e d ev elo p m en t of scien ce is b a se d on th e open c o m m u n ic a tio n a n d d e b a te am o n g s c ie n tists.
S h o u ld s c ie n tis ts seclu d e th em selv es from su c h c o m m u n ic atio n , bein g afraid of n o t being reco g n ised a s d iscoverers, th is will sp o il even th e scie n c e itself.
It is a n a g g ra v ate d case of p lag iarism w h e n the ed ito r or review er of th e p u b lic a tio n ex p ro p ria te s n ew th o u g h ts o r ex p erim en tal re s u lts of a n article su b m itte d for p u b lic a tio n , even indirectly, am ong o th e rs by its h a n d o v e r to a th ir d party.
5.1.4.
Bringing p e rso n al in flu en ce to b e a r u su ally offends th e dignity of p e rso n s, a n offence th a t can easily tu rn in to injury. It c a n aim a t the acq u isitio n of a position favourable to th e p e rso n bringing h is /h e r influence to b e a r, b u t also a t th e m aking of a decision u n fav o u rab le to a th ird party. Asking for co n sid eratio n or an y kind of b a rg a in m ay also occur. Intim idation of th e p ersons d ep en d in g on th e research er, u n ju stified restriction of th e freedom of re sea rc h a n d an y form of d iscrim in atio n also belong to this category. The ethical m isc o n d u ct of p e rso n a l influence m ay be, su b ject to th e c irc u m stan c es, qualified a s a crim inal a c t akin to b lack m ail or defam ation.
•32*
F u rth e r, to le ra tio n o r neglect o f th e in frin g em en t of th e a b o v em en tio n ed e th ic a l r u le s u n d e r e x te rn a l d u re s s a n d th e th r e a t o f re p ris a l a g a in s t the w h is tle blow er sh a ll also be q u alified as p e rs o n a l in flu en ce.
This circle also involves th e a tte m p t of ra isin g th e n u m b e r of referen ces th ro u g h p e rs o n a l p re s su re .
H u n g a ria n scien tific p u b lic o p in io n s tro n g ly c o n d e m n s m is c o n d u c ts of p e rs o n a l in flu en ce, in c lu d in g fav o u ritism in k in d , a n d p ro h ib its th e m in n o rm ativ e re g u la tio n s.
5 .2 . O ther m orally o b je c tio n a b le form s o f b eh a v io u r and p r a c tic e
B eside grievous e th ic a l m is c o n d u c ts , n u m e ro u s m orally objectio n ab le form s of b e h av io u r a n d re s e a rc h p ra c tice s a re also w o rth co n sid erin g . T hese c a n also u n d e rm in e p eo p le’s t r u s t in scien ce.
H ereinafter, w ith o u t striv in g for c o m p le ten e ss, th e following can be s tre ss e d :
5.2.1. Infringem ent o f social c o n se n s u s or the la w s In th is c o n tex t re s e a rc h activ ity h a rm fu l to th e e n v iro n m e n t c a n be m e n tio n e d a s a n exam ple.
The violation of effective law s a n d o th er legal re g u la tio n s re g a rd in g re s e a rc h (e.g. th o se re la tin g to e x a m in a tio n s c a rrie d o u t on h u m a n beings o r a n im a l tests) is eth ically u n a c c e p ta b le .
5.2.2. Infringem ent o f p e rso n a lity rights
H ere one c a n m e n tio n th e v io latio n of d ig n ity a n d freedom of p e rs o n s involved in scientific ex am in atio n a s e x p e rim e n ta l o b jects, th e o m issio n
•33*
of in fo rm atio n on e x p erim en tal ris k s , im perfect in fo rm atio n , o r th e b re a c h of secrecy.
5.2.3. Inappropriate m a n a g e m e n t o f d a ta
D enial o f h a n d o v er o f d a ta to o th e r re s e a rc h e rs c a u sin g fa ilu re of th e re c o n s tru c tio n of ex p eri m e n ta l re s u lts can be m en tio n ed h e re . Im p ro p er storage of orig in al d a ta , a lte ra tio n of d a ta , neglecting d a ta d is tu rb in g th e o u tc o m e d e sired , d isto rtio n o f d a ta , a n d ignoring u n e x p e c te d r e s u lts c a n also b e reck o n ed w ith here.
5.2.4. M isconduct regarding publica tio n
It is a n e th ic al m is c o n d u c t to d e n y deserved a u th o rsh ip , in s is t on or g r a n t u n d e se rv e d a u th o rs h ip s , a n d in g e n eral to in d ic a te m e rits relatin g to a u th o rs h ip in a false w ay. A m is c o n d u c t of th is k in d is a form of falsification.
In th e field of the n a tu r a l scien ces d u rin g the p u b lication o f re s u lts (discoveries) a c le a r re q u ire m e n t is th e ex clu sio n of m u ltip le p u b lic a tio n s, while in th e case o f th e social scien ces c le a r in d icatio n of a fte r-p u b lic a tio n is re q u ire d .
Inco m p lete in d ic a tio n of the s u p p o rte rs of th e re s e a rc h is also objectionable.
5.2.5. M isconduct regarding proofreading, publishing, a n d critical p ro ced u res
O n th e p a r t of p ro o frea d e rs of scien tific c o m m u n i
catio n s a n d ed ito rs of p u b lic a tio n s th e to leratio n of in co m p atib ility in th e critical p ro c e d u re sh a ll b e reg ard ed a s a n eth ical m isc o n d u c t. B o th on th e p a r t of th e e d ito r a n d th e review er it s h a ll be an e th ic a l
*34
m isc o n d u c t to give p re fe re n c e to c e r ta in a u th o r s d u rin g th e p u b lish in g p ro c e d u re o r conversely, to h in d e r th e p u b lic a tio n o f a n a rticle for p e rso n a l re a so n s. In th e sam e w a y , fu n d a m e n ta l e th ic a l p rin cip les m a y be in frin g ed d u rin g th e c o n sid e ra tio n of re se a rc h te n d e rs.
5.2.6. Publication o f f a l s e or d e ce p tiv e data relating to scie n tific work, p ublications, or a w a r d s
It sh all qualify a s a n eth ical m is c o n d u c t if som eone p u b lis h e s false o r deceptive d a t a reg ard in g h is o r h er scien tific work, o r in re la tio n to th e scien ce m e tric d a ta relatin g to h is or h e r p u b lic a tio n s, re se a rc h , scien tific a w a rd s .
The e v a lu a tio n of th e a b o v e b e h a v io u ra l a n d r e s e a rc h p ra c tic e s can a t le a s t p a rtia lly d e p en d o n th e given c u ltu r a l e n v iro n m e n t, local tra d itio n s , o r th e local legal system . It is d esirab le to fo rm u late a n d c o n tin u o u s ly e v alu ate th e n o rm s in a cc o rd a n ce w ith the lo cal, in this c a s e H u n g a ria n , c u ltu ra l tra d itio n s, v a lu e s and p u b lic opin io n draw ing on th e s u p p o rt o f th e in te rn a tio n a l lite r a tu r e an d th e ex p erien ces o b ta in e d fro m cases c o n sid e re d by e th ic s co m m ittees.
6. Procedure in the c a se o f suspected infringements of ethical rules
6.1 . The body carrying o u t th e ethical exam ination In th e case o f a su sp ic io n o f m is c o n d u c t infringing scientific e th ic a l s ta n d a r d s s ta rtin g a n d carry in g
• 3 5-
o u t th e p ro c e d u re s h a ll alw ays b e th e o b lig atio n of th e in s titu tio n (university, re s e a rc h or o th e r in stitu tio n ), w h ere th e re s e a rc h e r s u sp e c te d of co m m ittin g s u c h m is c o n d u c t is w orking. E th ic a l m is c o n d u c ts o c c u rrin g d u rin g th e d o c to ra l p ro c e d u re of HAS s h a ll c o n stitu te a n exception, a s th e in v estig atio n th e re o f a n d th e c o n d u c tin g o f th e re la tin g e th ic al p ro c e d u re sh all b e c o n d u c te d b y th e Science E th ics C o m m ittee of HAS.
As s tip u la te d in p a ra g ra p h 1, th e Science E th ic s C o m m ittee of HAS m ay also p ro ceed in o th e r p a rtic u la r c ases p ro v id ed both th e d e m a n d a n t a n d th e re s p o n d e n t u n d e r ta k e in w ritin g to s u b je c t th e m selv e s to th e p ro ced u re. A public b o d y m e m b e r of HAS, a p p ly in g for th e title D octor o f HAS a n d c o n trib u tin g to th e c o rre sp o n d in g d o c to ra l p ro c e d u re in an y fo rm sh all be obliged to s u b je c t him - o r h e rs e lf to th e p ro c e d u re by all m ean s. In th e case of d ecisio n s o f th e Science E th ic s C o m m ittee a d o p te d a t th e first in s ta n c e , th e P resid en cy o f th e HAS s h a ll a c t a s th e fo ru m of a p p e a l.
It is d esirab le for th e in s titu tio n s c o n d u c tin g eth ical p ro c e d u re s to have a n e th ic s c o m m ittee for th e c o n d u c tin g of th e ir in v estig atio n s, o r in th e a b se n c e th e re o f to s e t u p ad h oc co m m ittees in th e case o f a s u sp ic io n of eth ical m isc o n d u c t.
6 .2 . F u n d a m en ta l p r in c ip les o f an e th ic a l in v e s tig a tio n
6.2.1. Ascertaining the seriousness o f the misconduct In c a s e of a n e th ic a l m is c o n d u c t th e p ro p e r s te p s sh all d e p e n d on th e s e rio u s n e s s of th e act. In th is
•36*
re s p e c t th e level of d e m o n stra b le d e lib e ra te n e ss a n d th e w eight o f c o n se q u e n c e s sh all be c o n sid ered . A ny p erson s u b je c t to th e in v e stig atio n c a n only be re p rim a n d e d in case it c a n be d e m o n s tra te d t h a t h e or s h e com m itted t h e ethical m is c o n d u c t d elib erately a n d know ingly. As a s ta n d a r d of co n sid erin g ev id en ce the p rin c ip le of “s tro n g body of evidences” s h a ll be a p p lied .
6.2.2. E n su rin g the in tern a l integrity a n d legal regularity o f the p ro ce d u re
T h e in v estig atio n c o n d u c te d sh a ll b e fully co m p reh en siv e, regulated, a n d b a lan c e d ; it shall be b a se d on e x a c t e x p lo ra tio n , objectivity, a n d co m p leten ess.
It sh all be e n s u r e d th a t t h e p e rs o n s p a rtic ip a tin g in th e in v estig atio n p ro c e ss a re n o t affected or involved an d c a n n o t be a c c u s e d w ith p a rtia lity .
D etailed, w ritte n and d u ly signed d o c u m e n ts h a n d le d w ith confidence s h a ll be p re p a re d of th e p ro c e d u re.
6.2.3. Uniformity
P ro ced u res s h a ll in all c a s e s be c o n d u c te d in a w a y c o m p arab le to one a n o th e r , a c c o rd in g to th e sa m e p rin c ip le s and p ra c tic e s a n d s h a ll be tr a n s p a r e n t in th e ir every d e ta il.
6 .2.4. B alance
T h e in v estig atio n shall b e carried o u t in full re s p e c t of the v a lid in te re sts o f a ll p a rtie s c o n c e rn e d a n d b e in line w ith th e relev an t law s a n d re g u la tio n s.
•37-
P e rso n s a c c u s e d of e th ic a l m is c o n d u c t s h a ll be given full d e tails of th e eth ical m isc o n d u c t a ttr ib u te d to th e m a n d given th e p o ssib ility for re s p o n d in g to alleg atio n s in w ritin g , a sk in g q u e stio n s, p re s e n tin g evidence, calling w itn e sse s, a n d providing re s p o n s e s to th e in fo rm atio n p re se n te d .
W itn esses s h a ll have th e n e c e s sa ry in fo rm atio n on th e p ro c e d u re , a n d th ey m u s t be allow ed to seek advice a n d a s s is ta n c e if th e y so w ish.
P e rso n s fo u n d to have c o m m itted a re s e a rc h m is c o n d u c t s h a ll be sa n c tio n e d p ro p o rtio n ately .
D ecisions m a d e sh all be s u b je c t to a p p e a l a n d th e re sh all be a b o d y or p e rs o n receiving th e appeal.
No p e rso n s h a ll suffer a n y dam age o r p e n alty for m a k in g a n alleg atio n of e th ic a l m is c o n d u c t, b u t a c tio n sh all be ta k e n a g a in s t p e rs o n s fo u n d to have m a d e alleg atio n s in b ad faith .
6.2.5. C lo se n e ss o f the m a n a g e m e n t o f th e p ro ced u re to the inform ation h a n d le d The p ro c e d u re sh a llb e c o n d u c te d a s co n fid en tially a s p o ssib le in o rd e r to p ro te c t th o se involved in the in v estig atio n fro m u n fo u n d e d a c c u s a tio n s . S u ch co n fid en tiality s h a ll be m a in ta in e d p ro v id ed th is d o e s n o t h a rm th e c o m p le te n e ss of in v estig atio n , o r th e h e a lth a n d safety of p a rtic ip a n ts in re se a rc h .
In fo rm atio n a risin g d u rin g th e in v e stig atio n m ay only be h a n d e d over to a th ir d p a rty w ith a w ritten s ta te m e n t of con fid en tiality .
If th e o rg a n isa tio n c o n d u c tin g th e in v estig atio n h a s legal o b lig atio n s to inform a n y oth er o rg a n isa tio n re g a rd in g th e c o n te n t o r fin d in g s of
•38*
th e in v estig atio n , th o s e o b lig a tio n s m u s t b e fulfilled a t th e a p p ro p ria te tim e by t h e a p p ro p ria te m e a n s.
6.2.6. P resu m p tio n o f in n o cen ce
P e rso n s a c c u s e d of having co m m itted a n eth ical m isc o n d u c t s h a ll be p r e s u m e d in n o c e n t u n til p ro v en guilty.
No p erso n s h o u ld suffer a n y p en alty u n til the alleg a tio n of h is o r h e r h av in g co m m itted a n eth ical m isc o n d u c t is fu lly proven.
6.2.7. Publicity o f the reso lu tio n o f the Science Ethics C om m ittee
T h e fact of a re s e a rc h e r h a v in g co m m itted a n ethic m isc o n d u c t sh a ll b e made p u b lic . The re s o lu tio n s are b asically p u b lic , deviation is possible in case th e p u b licatio n in frin g es th e p e rs o n a lity rig h ts of a p e rso n n o t re p rim a n d e d .
In its re so lu tio n th e S c ie n ce E thics C o m m ittee m a k e s a p ro p o sal for the fo rm its s ta n d sh o u ld becom e public.
6.2.8. Sanctioning ethical m isco n d u c t
In th e case o f an e th ic a l m is c o n d u c t the p ro p e r m e a su re s a n d s a n c tio n s d e p en d o n the s e rio u sn e s s of th e act. Follow ing th e a sc e rta in in g of th e m is c o n d u c t and b e y o n d the p u b lic a tio n thereof, th e S cien ce Ethics C o m m ittee, if it d eem s it n e c e ssa ry , in fo rm s the in s titu tio n or o rg a n isa tio n of th e offender on th e m isc o n d u c t sep arately .
•39*
PROCEDURES OF THE SCIENCE ETHICS
COMMITTEE OF THE HUNGARIAN ACADEMY OF
SCIENCES
1. Legal Status of the Science Ethics Committee
The Science Ethics C om m ittee (SEC) of th e H u n g arian Academ y of Sciences (HAS) is, according to p o in t h) of p a ra g ra p h (2) of article 9 of th e Act XL of 1994 on th e H u n g arian A cadem y of S ciences (HASL) a n d p a ra g rap h (2) of article 32 of the S ta tu te s (STAT) is a stan d in g com m ittee of the G eneral Assembly of HAS, th e m em bers of w h ich are elected by the G en e
ral Assem bly. SEC sh all fulfil its role independently, in exclusive su b o rd in atio n to the G eneral A ssem bly a n d on th e b a sis of th e relevant effective laws, fu rth e r it sh all rep o rt on its activity to the G en eral A ssem bly annually.
2. Scope o f duties and competence of SEC
The d uties of SEC are determ ined by th e HASL, th e STAT, th e Procedures o f HAS, the C ode of C o n d u ct (Code) a n d M em orandum (hereinafter collectively referred to as: Code of Conduct), (par. (13) o f art. 2 4 o f STAT)
2 .1 . SEC
2.1.1. ta k es a stan d o n th e protection of the freedom of scientific research a n d the integrity of scientific public life in principal q u estio n s of scien ce ethics (point g) o f par. (1) o f art. 3 o f HASL, par (1) o f art. 32 o f STAT)
The d o cu m en t w a s accepted by th e m em bers of th e Presidency w ith th e ir resolution No. 3 4 /2 0 1 2 . (IV. 10.)
•43-
2.1.2. u p o n request, it proceeds in all cases t h a t endanger th e ethical principles of scientific research, or w henever th e suspicion of science e th ic m isconduct arises; (par. (2) o f art. 32 o f STAT and M emorandum )
2.1.3. exam ines p etitio n s su b m itted on eth ical m isconduct occurring d u rin g doctoral procedures;
(point 6.1. o f Code)
2.1.4. b a se d on the m o tio n of the scientific section of HAS in ch arg e of th e p articu lar field of science it m akes decisions on th e su sp en sio n o f public body m em bership; (par. (2) o f art. 21 o f STAT)
2.1.5. proceeds a t first instance in the c a s e s determ ined in points 2.1.2-2.1.4, a n d also at seco n d instance a s a n appellate forum u p o n request in th e case of decisions ad o p ted by th e science e th ic com m ittees of research in stitu tes, h ig h e r edu catio n an d oth er in stitu tio n s a n d organizations; (Memoran
dum)
2.1.6. m ay, for th e utilisation of th e experiences acquired d u rin g its proceeding, m ake a proposal for th e am en d m en t of the Code of C o n d u ct towards th e General Assembly; (Memorandum)
2.1.7. re p o rts on its activity yearly to the G eneral Assembly, (par. (9) o f art. 2 7 o f STAT)
2.2 . The c o m p e te n c e o f SEC shall cover:
2.2.1. th e public body m em bers of HAS, th e procedure for obtaining th e scientific title Doctor of HAS a n d all persons participating th erein , a n d th e scientific research ers m entioned in p o in t 1 of the C ode of C onduct of HAS; (point 1 o f Code)
•44*
2.2.2. the science ethic cases in w h ich both th e d e m a n d a n t a n d th e re sp o n d en t an n o u n ce in w riting th a t they su b ject them selves to the procedure, (par.
(3) o f art. 32 ofSTA T, point 6.1. o f Code). In the case of th o se listed u n d e r point 2.2.1 the conducting of th e procedure does n o t need a statem en t of subjection from either th e d e m an d a n t o r th e respondent.
3. Members and officers o f SEC
3 .1 . SEC h a s tw enty-two m em bers elected by th e G eneral Assem bly in a sec re t ballot for 3 years (one academ ic period). The m em b ers may be elected for a n additional academ ic period a t th e longest. T he m em bers of th e Science E th ics C om m ittee are n o m in ated by th e scientific sections of HAS, on e person p e r section of th e full and corresponding m em bers of th e Academy a n d one person from am ong doctor m em b ers of th e pu b lic body. In case a m em b er of th e com m ittee is p erm an en tly h am p ered (for a period exceeding 6 m onths) in th e fulfilment of h is /h e r com m ittee duties, or h is or h er m em bership ceases for a n y reason, on b a se of the n om ination from th e section concerned th e N om inating Com m ittee m ak es a proposal to the G ene
ral Assem bly for th e election of a new m em ber, (point h) o f par. (2) o f art. 9 o f H ASL a n d par. (2) o f art. 32 o f STAT)
3 .2 . The P resident of HAS sh a ll provide for th e calling of th e first sitting of SEC following its election. The m em b ers of SEC shall elect th e ch airp erso n chairing th e first sitting a n d the p re sid en t of SEC o u t of th eir own circle. It is th e duty of th e ch airp erso n to conduct th e election of a president. Prior to the election of a p resid en t any m em ber of th e com m ittee can m ake
*4 5-
a proposal on th e p erso n of th e president. The ch airp erso n can also be elected to serve as p re sid en t of SEC. The m em ber of SEC who h a s been p re sid en t of SEC for only one period can be elected for a seco n d period, p ar. (6) o f art. 2 7 o f STAT)
3.3 . The com m ittee elects the p re sid en t of SEC with a sim ple m ajority secret ballot. W ith the election of the p resid en t of SEC th e duty of th e ch airp erso n shall cease. The m an d ate of th e p resid en t of SEC sh a ll last for the period of th e m a n d a te of SEC. The work o f SEC is governed by the p re sid en t of th e com m ittee. In case the p re sid en t is p erm an en tly h a m p ered (for a period exceeding 6 m onths) in the fulfilm ent of h is /h e r com m ittee duties, or h is or her com m ittee m em bership ceases for a n y reason, SEC shall elect a new p resid en t (point d) o f par. (1) o f art. 58. o f STAT)
3.4 . The secretarial du ties of SEC shall be fulfilled by th e Legal and A dm inistrative D ep artm en t of the HAS Secretariat. The secretary o f SEC is a lawyer nom in ated from a m o n g the civil servants of the d e p artm en t by the h e a d of d e p artm en t and charged with th e fulfilment of th e duty by th e president o f SEC.
The secretary shall be m an d ated w ith the h an d o v er of a w ritten, filed letter of com m ission. The p resid en t of SEC m ay cease th e m a n d ate of th e secretary a n d call the h e ad of d e p artm en t upon th e nom ination o f a new secretary. The secretary p articip ates a t the sittin g s of SEC w ith co n su ltatio n right b u t w ith no right o f vote.
4. Operation of SEC
4 .1 . SEC proceeds as a body a n d exercises its com petences at th e com m ittee sitting, its m em bers
*46-
have voting rights. It form ulates a position, or it m ay do so in cases o r in relation to activities determ ined in p o in ts 2.1.1, 2 .1 .6 an d 2.1.7 a n d it adopts a resolution in cases d eterm in ed in points 2.1.2, 2.1.3, 2.1.4 and 2.1.5.
4 .2 . Voting on th e position o r resolution (hereinafter collectively referred to as: decision) of th e com m ittee c a n only be executed personally. An a b s e n t m em ber c a n only su b m it a n opinion or proposal in writing (electronically, via e-mail, facsim ile, etc.). In exceptional a n d reaso n ed cases, w hen th e m em bers of SEC are a cq u ain ted w ith all relevant details of a c ertain case, th e presid en t of SEC can call u p o n the m em bers to vote electronically or in w riting a t a later d ate.
4 .3 . SEC sh all sit as often a s th e need a rises, b u t a t least th ree tim es a year. The presid en t sh a ll convene SEC a t least 8 d ays prior to th e sitting by indicating th e agenda, v en u e and date in writing (via mail, fax o r e-mail). In extraordinary c a se s the sittin g m ay be convened w ithin 8 days as well.
4 .4 . The sittin g of SEC sh all be p rep ared by the secretary of th e com m ittee according to th e directions of th e p resid en t a n d they sh all jointly provide for the execution of th e decisions of SEC.
4 .5 . The sitting is presided by the president. In the case of the incapacitation of th e president th e present m em b ers shall elect a chair from am ong them selves.
4 .6 . The sittin g is in q u o ru m w hen a t least 12 m em b ers of SEC are p resen t. SEC a d o p ts its resolutions w ith a simple m ajority of open votes, in the case of a tie, however, the vote of the p re sid en t shall
*47*
