Professor A and docent B suspected the international evaluation of a project led by A to have been biased, and that professor X, who acted as an evaluator, should have been disqualified due to bias. A preliminary inquiry conducted at the university examined the claim and found no proof of bias on professor X’s part.
It is not TENK’s duty to assess the quality of the evaluation of the research team. Questions related to research integrity only arise if procedures have been careless and give the impression that the report has purposefully denigrated the researchers being evaluated. The preliminary inquiry found no proof of this, and the persons who requested the statement did not provide any additional information that would give TENK grounds to re evaluate the case or to conclude that the investigation had been insufficient.
Professor A and docent B also accused professor Y, who had conducted the preliminary inquiry, of bias. They provided no concrete proof to back up this claim, however. Based on the documents received by TENK, there was no cause to suspect an RCR violation. Therefore TENK considered the university to have been justified in deciding to conclude the handling of the case without an investigation proper.