Former UCT vice-chancellor Mamokgethi Phakeng has welcomed the public protector’s finding that it would have been improper for the university to award a student a Doctor of Philosophy Degree (PhD) while the examination outcome of his thesis did not comply with the required standard of proficiency.
Phakeng said she was “once again” proven correct.
“This is the case that caused the fallout between me and the (university) ombud, who hit back by arguing that I am a bully. Once again I was correct. Call me whatever you like, but no ombud has the authority to instruct any VC to pass any student who has plagiarised a PhD thesis.
“The student ... argued that he cannot spend four years in South Africa and leave without a PhD. No one should trust any ombud who supports such.”
Acting Public Protector Kholeka Gcaleka released her report following an investigation into allegations of improper conduct and maladministration by UCT relating to its decision not to confer a PhD to Adam Andani.
According to the report, Andani lodged a complaint with the public protector in 2019 requesting that an investigation be conducted and remedial action be taken over UCT’s decision.
He had made a number of attempts to appeal internally at the university.
However, these failed after it was found that he allegedly plagiarised the dissertation of another former student and as a result his thesis did not meet the required proficiency standard of UCT.
Andani refuted the allegations but insisted the process was flawed when the university nominated and appointed a professor as the third examiner, which negatively affected and jeopardised the outcome of his PhD thesis.
“The allegation regarding irregularities in the decision-making process culminating in UCT not conferring Mr Andani a PhD, is not substantiated.
“UCT’s decision not to confer a PhD degree to Mr Andani was informed by plagiarism found in his thesis. As a result, the complainant’s thesis was found to have not complied with the required standard of proficiency in terms of section 65B of HEA (the Higher Education Act). The complainant denied himself the opportunity to be heard when he declined the UCT tribunal's invitation to a hearing, which was intended to give him a chance to present his case,” said Gcaleka.
The institution’s spokesperson, Elijah Moholola, said: “UCT notes the outcome of the investigation by the public protector in the matter.”
Cape Times