Lithuanian PM given six months to correct dissertation

In late June, the Lithuanian parliament backed Mindaugas Sinkevičius to be the country’s next Prime Minister. On July 14th, he took office in and became the country’s Prime Minister.

However, even before the seat was warm, he began to face allegations of plagiarism in his 2015 dissertation at the ISM University of Management and Economics.

Sinkevičius, for his part, strongly denied the allegations. He claimed that he had defended the dissertation 11 years ago and that no one raised the issues with him then.

Initially, ISM said that it would not investigate the allegations. Since the dissertation had been successfully defended and published, it was assumed to have met the academic and research standards of the time.

However, the school would eventually backtrack on that decision and it began an investigation into the dissertation. Now, roughly three months later, the school has announced its findings and says that it found, “Significant violations of academic standards,” in the paper. According to the school, this included, “incorrect use of other people’s texts and the indication of sources.”

That said, the school stopped short of revoking his degree or retracting the dissertation. Instead, the school has given the Prime Minister six months to correct the issues.

While many will likely find this outcome disappointing, given the recent history of political plagiarism scandals in the region, it’s likely that it’s the best realistic outcome.

Understanding the Case

Details of this case are thin. As such, I’ve not been able to independently examine his dissertation or the allegations against Sinkevičius.

The reason for that is, to my knowledge, the allegations against Sinkevičius were not made publicly. Instead, they were made in a complaint to the country’s academic ethics watchdog. However, local academics did say that they reviewed the dissertation and said that automated tools raised serious questions about similarities between Sinkevičius’ dissertation and other works.

Initially, the school said that it would not investigate the allegations. They argued that the dissertation had been successfully defended and that the matter is closed. However, just over a week later, the school reversed course and said that they were examining Sinkevičius’ work.

Then, at the end of October, the school announced its findings. They claimed to have found five instances of plagiarism in the dissertation as well as two instances of “improper text use that did not constitute plagiarism.”

Through the school found that the dissertation, as written, does not meet the academic standards of the school, it stopped short of revoking his degree. Instead, the school has given Seinkevičius six months to correct the issues and have the dissertation re-evaluated.

In the end, it’s unlikely that Seinkevičius will have his degree revoked. As long as he corrects the stated issues and resubmits the dissertation as the school has requested, he’ll likely be fine.

While that may be a disappointing outcome for some, it’s still more than many political figures in the region have faced.

A Long History of Political Plagiarism

Seinkevičius appears to be the first Lithuanian political figure to face these kinds of issues on the international stage. However Europe, in particular Eastern Europe, has a long history of high-ranking politicians being accused of plagiarism in their academic work.

Those who have been accused of plagiarism have typically gone down one of two paths.

The first is that they are fired, forced to resign or otherwise are removed from their position. This includes former German Education Minister Annette Schavan, Hungarian President Pál Schmitt and Czech Justice Minister Tatiana Malá.

The second is that they survive the allegations and, for the most part, suffer no real consequences. This includes former German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen (current President of the European Commission), Romanian Prime Minister Nicolae Ciucă and the Slovakian Prime Minister Igor Matovič.

There are many factors that determine which path a particular case takes. Those include the politician’s country, the political climate, the severity of the allegations, the decision of the university and more. Some leaders, such as Ciucă, have been able to “clear” themselves of the allegations through dubious means. Others were pushed to resign before the a determination was made. There is almost no consistency.

The only thing that is consistent is that such allegations are either career-ending or non-issues. There’s been almost no in-between. This case breaks that trend by offering something of a middle ground, even if it may not be satisfying to Sinkevičius’ accusers.

Finding a Middle Ground

Plagiarism, and academic/research integrity issues in general, are not binary issues. While there are certainly cases where plagiarism should be a career-ending issue, there are many shades of gray between “no issue” and “career-ending.”

To repeat, I don’t know if this is the correct response to Seinkevičius’ issues. I have not independently reviewed the allegations against him. But it is interesting that the school has opted for a middle ground solution. Rather than immediately revoking his degree, likely bringing an end to Seinkevičius’ political career, they are giving him a chance to rectify the issues and will re-evaluate the situation after that.

People are often very critical of these kinds of half-measures. However, having a degree of corrective action that one can take better reflects the nuanced nature of academic and research integrity issues. Not every situation is a simple matter of right or wrong, nuanced issues require nuanced solutions.

That nuance is what makes Seinkevičius’ case unique. Other politicians in the same position have either been “exonerated” or lost everything. There’s been almost no in-between. IMS is acknowledging that there are some issues with the dissertation, but is taking a different approach to addressing them.

Whether this will work and what impact it will have on Seinkevičius in the long run is yet to be seen. But it is refreshing to see that the school is both trying to hold the Prime Minister accountable for their work while also not rushing to the opposite extreme.

Bottom Line

When I see cases like this one, one of my first questions is, “What is the best outcome for academic and research integrity as a whole?”

To be clear, there are situations where one’s actions are so egregious that they absolutely should be career-ending. Degree revocation, blacklisting and other strong actions are sometimes necessary and should not be taken off the table in those cases.

But they shouldn’t be the only options. Just as there are shades of gray when it comes to plagiarism and other integrity violations, there also needs to be shades of gray when it comes to how schools respond to them.

While I can’t vouch for Seinkevičius and say that this is the correct response, it’s refreshing to see a nuanced response nonetheless.Though the school’s initial response was deeply flawed, they ultimately investigated the claims, took ban adequate amount of time with them and came to a conclusion that attempts to strike a balance.

Hopefully this is an example that other schools and other political figures will learn from. These cases do not have to be a simple coin flip, career or no career. There are other options available. It’s past time that universities began to recognize that.