Personal Data Protection and Research Integrity

Translated from Estonian into English
 

SENATE REGULATION
Tartu 26 November 2020, No 1- 28/16
 

Good Academic Practice and Implementation of Principles of Academic Ethics in
Estonian University of Life Sciences

Adopted pursuant to Clause 13 (2) 3) of the Statutes of Estonian University of Life Sciences.
 

General Part
Good academic practice is a set of principles and ways of operating, according to which
Estonian University of Life Sciences (hereinafter the University) and its membership can ensure
purposeful and transparent operation, striving for universal knowledge as an institution to
uphold and follow the humanistic tradition.
Good academic practice describes what kind of behaviour is expected of the University
membership and the University responsibility in ensuring academic integrity.

1. Good academic practice
1.1. Good academic practice is based on good behavioural ethics, good communication and
attitude, open cooperation within the University and with the society, and following the
principles of academic ethics. Good workplace and academic study environment, friendly
internal atmosphere, respectful attitude, recognition of employees and students, exchange of
experience, open communication and good reputation management ensure a sense of security
for students and employees.
1.2. The University ensures efficient and open management and the involvement of various
stakeholders in decision-making processes through equal treatment.
1.3. The University shall apply transparent and open communication to solve problems.
1.4. The University respects the fundamental values and principles of academic ethics described
in the Magna Charta Universitatum, the Code of Ethics of Estonian Scientists adopted in 2002,
and the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity finalised in 2017 in cooperation of
Estonian research institutions, the Estonian Academy of Sciences, the Estonian Research
Council, and the Ministry of Education and Research.
By joining the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity Agreement, the University
confirms to
a) respect and observe the most essential values of research integrity, which are freedom,
responsibility, honesty and objectivity, respect and caring, justice, openness and
cooperation.
b) acknowledge the responsibility of individual researchers and research institutions,
research organisations and financers of research concerning planning of research,
conduct of research, publishing and application of research results, identification and
resolution of conflicts of interest, ensuring collegiality in the workplace, dissemination
and promotion of the principles of research integrity;
c) observe, disseminate, promote and apply the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research
Integrity and do everything in our power to prevent misconduct, to uncover cases of
misconduct and to deal with cases of misconduct appropriately;
d) cooperate to apply the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity and to work out
the rules of procedure for dealing with cases of misconduct to ensure the credibility of
research, and as equal treatment of members of different research institutions as
possible.

2. Principles of Academic Ethics
2.1. The University appreciates its membership and ensures following the principles of equal
treatment for all employees and students.
2.2. The University follows the principles of academic ethics described in the five sections of
Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity:
1) planning of research;
2) conduct of research;
3) authorship, publishing and application of research results;
4) researcher in the research community;
5) observance, promotion and application of research integrity
2.3. Academic activities and organisation of work are guided by principles that are specific
(expecting the unanimity of academic staff or resulting from legal acts and international
agreements) and general (the academic staff and the University are free to decide), and describe
how the University membership behaves without compromising the credibility of the
University and academic activities. In the event of a conflict of principles and the emergence
of novel situations not covered by the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, the
academic staff and the University have the opportunity to consider and decide on the best
possible behaviour, but this choice must be well considered, justified and based on the core
values of the Code of Conduct for Research Integrity.
2.4. For academic ethics, the University shall apply the general principles of activity described
in the fifth part of the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity: Observance, promotion
and application of research integrity.
2.5. The membership of the University shall be guided, in all activities, by principles specified
in Clause 2.2 and 2.3. of this Regulation. The University shall support its membership in
understanding and responding to ethical issues. Members of the University shall follow the
principles of academic ethics and respond to breaches of academic ethics.
2.6. The Senate shall form the Academic Ethics Committee, the task of which is 1) to introduce
the principles of academic ethics at the University and prevent systemic problems, and 2) to
solve problems related to misunderstanding or violation of academic ethics at the University,
by applying the principle of equal treatment.

3. Breaches of Principles of Academic Ethics
3.1. The University shall protect persons who have reported a suspicion or a complaint of a
breach and have done so in good faith, ensure the confidentiality of any proceeding of a possible
breach, and protect the dignity and privacy of all concerned persons and parties.
3.2. In case of a suspected possible breach of the principles of academic ethics, the University
members have the right to seek advice from the supervisor, a colleague, the head of the chair
or the authorised employee of the institute and, if necessary, inform the Chairman of the
Academic Ethics Committee in confidence and in writing (APPENDIX 2); specifying, if
possible, which principle of the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity has been
violated. The anonymously described information of the cases handled by the authorised staff
of the institutes (academic ethics advisor) shall be stored in the document management system.
3.3. A suspicion or a complaint of breach are handled by the Academic Ethics Committee,
which shall follow the procedure for “Establishing the Academic Ethics Committee, the
principles and organization of activities, the procedure for handling suspicions and complaints”
laid down by the University Senate (APPENDIX 1), ensuring fairness, impartiality and
transparency of the process.
3.4. The Academic Ethics Committee adopts a position on the received complaint, makes
proposals for resolving the situation and formalises the decision. If the proceedings reveal that
there is a more appropriate institution or body to deal with the breach, the Academic Ethics
Committee shall refer the suspected breach or complaint concerning the research integrity to
the competent official or body.
3.5. In the case of a notification of a possible breach described in Clauses 3.2. and 3.3. of this
Regulation and the corresponding proceedings described above, the parties shall be guaranteed
access to the information of the proceedings, and it shall be ensured that public information
respects the privacy and dignity of all parties.

4. This Regulation addresses the responsibilities related to the activities of the University and
its members, and do not extend to scientific journals, research funders, evaluators and
researchers' associations and other organizations.
5. Issues of academic ethics related to academic studies are regulated in Regulation of studies,
Conditions and Procedure for Applying and Awarding Doctoral Degrees and Requirements
and Procedure for the Awarding of Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees.
6. Repeal Regulation No. 1-5/8 of the Council of the University of September 27, 2018.
7. The Regulation shall take effect on 1 December 2020.

Translated from Estonian into English
Senate dated 26 November 2020, Regulation 1- 28/16
 

Annex 1.
Establishing the Academic Ethics Committee, the principles and organization of activities,
the procedure for proceeding a suspicion and a complaint of a breach

1. Establishing the Academic Ethics Committee (hereinafter the Committee),
organization of activities
1.1. The Committee consists of five members, involved with different sectoral and
professional positions in academic activities, one of whom is an external member from
outside the University.
1.2. The members of the Committee are appointed by the Senate on the proposal of the
Rector. The Senate shall also appoint the Chairman of the Committee.
1.3. The Committee shall elect a Vice-chairman from among its members to chair the
Committee in the Chairman’s absence.
1.4. The Chairman of the Committee organises and directs the work of the Committee. The
Chairman is responsible for the integrity, fairness, relevance and transparency of the
work of the Committee and for documenting the proceedings.
1.5. The work of the Chairman, Vice-chairman and members of the Committee is
considered to be an additional task for which the additional remuneration is determined
by the Rector. A contract arrangement shall be entered into with the external member
by the Rector.
1.6. If necessary, the Committee may involve additional members or experts from outside
the University in its work. The need for additional members depends on the nature of
the suspicion or complaint of a breach.
1.7. The term of office of the Committee shall be three years.
1.8. Upon receipt of a written suspicion or complaint (application), the Committee must
reply within two weeks if the suspicion or complaint of a breach shall be proceeded.
In case of a refusal, the reasons shall be given.
1.9. The period for hearing a suspicion or a complaint of a breach shall be one month; if
necessary, this period may be extended by two months; in that case the parties
concerned shall be informed.

2. The Academic Ethics Committee is guided by the following principles
2.1. Proceedings are fair, comprehensive and appropriate, without compromising the
correctness, objectivity or comprehensiveness of the process.
2.2. Participants in the proceedings shall declare any conflicts of interest that may arise
during the proceedings. The information shall be documented.
2.3. Proceeding a suspicion or a complaint of a breach ends with expressing a position on
the suspicion or complaint and making a proposal to resolve the situation.
2.4. The proceedings shall be conducted with due regard for confidentiality to protect the
persons involved in the process.
2.5. The University shall protect the rights of persons who have reported a suspicion or a
complaint of a breach and ensure that the person’s career prospects are not
compromised.
2.6. To ensure transparency and coherence, the principles for proceeding the breaches of
academic ethics are publicly available.
2.7. The defendant shall be given a full account of the act(s) of which the person is accused
and shall be given the opportunity to object to the allegations and to provide evidence
in support of his position.
2.8. The University shall impose punitive measures on the person against whom a charge
of breach of academic ethics has been confirmed in proportion to the seriousness of
the violation, specifying whether the principles of academic ethics were violated
intentionally or unintentionally.
2.9. In the case of an honest error or a single and minor breach no penalty is needed, the
final result may be a solution that satisfies all parties.
2.10. The defendant shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
2.11. In the case of a malicious complaint the Committee will adopt a position and make
proposals to resolve the situation.

3. Procedure of proceeding a suspicion or a complaint of a breach
3.1. The Committee shall proceed a suspicion (cases in which the whistleblower has no
personal interests or claims) or a complaint, when the Chairman of the Committee has
received a written application or if there is public interest in the situation of a suspected
breach.
3.2. The person who submitted the application or his/her representative may submit the
application in confidence for the initial protection of the person, e.g. a sealed envelope
with personal data inside the application envelope.
3.3. The Committee may, if necessary, interview the person who submitted the complaint,
provided that the interests of the person are not unduly prejudiced.
3.4. The proceedings of a suspicion or a complaint of a breach consist of five stages:
1) initial assessment of the case;
2) inquiry and data collection;
3) formal hearings of the parties concerned;
4) formulating a position containing a conclusion in writing and proposals for
resolving the situation;
5) communicating the written position and proposals. The Committee shall decide on
the persons to whom the document shall be forwarded.
3.5. All proceedings are confidential, all activities are recorded and all materials are stored
in such a way that falsification is excluded. The minutes shall be approved by all
members of the Committee and shall be signed by the Chairman of the Committee and
the secretary.
3.6. With the consent of the concerned parties, formal hearings of the case shall be recorded
in order to avoid further dispute and misunderstanding.
3.7. As part of the proceedings, the Committee has the right to gather additional
information about the circumstances of the situation and to interview the University
staff for this purpose. The University staff have the duty to assist, give statements and
provide written material as part of the Committee proceedings. Additional information
collected shall also be documented and linked to the initial assessment of the suspicion
or complaint of a breach of Code of Conduct for Research Integrity.
3
3.8. In the course of the proceedings, the data is processed in the document management
system, where the access of unauthorized employees is prevented by the rights
management system and the compliance of the e-mail account security requirements
by the employees.
3.9. The decision shall be taken by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Committee.
Depending on the circumstances established during the proceedings, the decision may
be one of the following:
1) Rejection of the suspicion or complaint of a breach – if the materials collected
during the procedure do not indicate a breach of academic ethics or if it is not
possible to prove the breach on the basis of the collected material.
2) Referral of the suspicion or complaint of a breach to another institution or body
- if the materials gathered during the procedure show that there is a breach of
applicable law or the rules of another institution.
3) Breaches of principles of academic ethics have been proved.
3.10. The written decision must contain information on the circumstances of the case. The
decision proposes improvements to the situation, appropriate next steps or sanctions
(e.g. in case of fabrication, falsification and plagiarism). The decision shall be
forwarded to the parties concerned and, if necessary, to the Rector or the employer's
representative.
3.11. The Academic Ethics Committee makes anonymous short summaries of the cases
processed. Depending on the circumstances of the situation and the interests of the
persons, the materials may remain confidential even after the suspicion or complaint
of the Code of Conduct for Research Integrity has ended. If necessary, all previous
materials shall be available at least to the Chairman of the Academic Ethics
Committee. The Committee will aim at identifying systemic shortcomings involved in
the situation and make proposals to help prevent them in the future.
3.12. The Chairman of the Academic Ethics Committee shall decide in which case the third
party access to procedural materials, including access to the heads of the structural
units to materials related to their subordinates, is justified. In particular, the access is
justified in the event of a proven breach, followed by sanctions.

Translated from Estonian into English
Senate dated 26 November 2020, Regulation 1- 28/16

Annex 2.
Submitting an application
1. The application shall be submitted in writing to the Chairman of the Committee.
2. The application shall include the following information:
1) the name and surname, e-mail and telephone number of the applicant;
2) position (employee); curriculum (student);
3) the content of the suspicion or complaint of a breach and, if possible, the Estonian
Code of Conduct for Research Integrity clause that has been breached;
4) information on whether and if so, to whom the person who submitted the application on
a suspicion or complaint of a breach has previously approached to find a solution;
5) if possible, what the solution to the problem could be;
6) in the case of an application on paper, the date and signature;
7) attached documents with the list of the documents, if applicable.

At the request of the applicant, he or she or their representative may use the opportunity for
the initial protection of the applicant, e.g. a sealed envelope with personal data inside the
application envelope.