|
Declaration
of Academic Freedom (scientific human rights) known also as the
Academic Bill of Rights is authored by Dmitri Rabounski, the
Editor-in-Chief of Progress in Physics. Original
text in English was
published in the journal as an open letter to the scientific community
(January, 2006). Later it was translated into other languages. Both
orginal text and the translations are accessed, in PDF format, through
the direct links to the publications:
 Original
text of the Declaration in English,
Progress in Physics,
2006, v.1, 57-60.
Translations
of the Declaration into other
languages:
 Spanish
(translated by Juan
Francisco
González Hernández and Jorge Mahecha
Gómez), Progress in Physics,
2006,
v.2, 93-96.
 Dutch
(translated by Eit
Gaastra),
Progress in Physics, 2006, v.3, 3-6.
 Bulgarian
(translated by Danko
D. Georgiev),
Progress in Physics, 2007, v.3, 90-93.
 Romanian
(translated by Florentin
Smarandache),
Progress in Physics, 2007, v.3, 94-97.
 French
(translated by Florentin
Smarandache
and Stéphanie
Robitaille-Trzcinski), Progress in Physics,
2007, v.3, 98-101.
 Russian
(translated by Elmira
Isaeva),
Progress in Physics, 2007, v.3, 102-106.
Declaration
of Academic Freedom
Article
1: Preamble
The beginning of the
21st century reflects more than at any other time in the history
of Mankind, the depth and
significance of the role of science and technology in human affairs.
The powerfully pervasive
nature of
modern science and technology has given rise to a commonplace
perception that further key discoveries can be made principally
or solely by large government
or corporation funded research groups with access to enormously
expensive instrumentation and hordes of support personnel.
The common perception is
however,
mythical, and belies the true nature of how scientific discoveries are
really made. Large and expensive technological projects, howsoever
complex, are but the result of the application of the profound
scientific insights of small groups of dedicated researchers or lone
scientists, often working in isolation.
A scientist working alone is now and in the future, just as in the
past, able to make a discovery that can substantially influence the
fate of humanity and change the face of the whole planet upon
which we so insignificantly dwell.
Groundbreaking
discoveries are
generally made by individuals working in subordinate positions within
government agencies, research and teaching institutions, or commercial
enterprises. Consequently, the researcher is all too often constrained
or suppressed by institution and corporation directors who, working to
a different agenda, seek to control and apply scientific discovery
and research for
personal or organizational profit, or self-aggrandisement.
The historical record of
scientific
discovery is replete with instances of suppression and ridicule by
establishment, yet in later years revealed and vindicated by the
inexorable march of practical necessity and intellectual enlightenment.
So too is the record blighted and besmirched by plagiarism and
deliberate misrepresentation, perpetrated by the unscrupulous,
motivated by envy and cupidity. And so it is
today.
The aim of this
Declaration is to
uphold and further the fundamental doctrine that scientific research
must be free of the latent and overt repressive influence of
bureaucratic, political, religious and pecuniary directives, and
that scientific creation is a human right no less than other such
rights and forlorn hopes as propounded in
international covenants and international law.
All supporting scientists
shall
abide by this Declaration, as an indication of solidarity with the
concerned international scientific community, and to vouchsafe the
rights of the citizenry of the world to unfettered scientific
creation according to their individual skills and disposition, for the
advancement of science and, to their
utmost ability as decent citizens in an indecent world, the benefit of
Mankind. Science and technology have been far too long the
handmaidens of oppression.
Article
2: Who is a
scientist
A scientist is any person
who does
science. Any person who collaborates with a scientist in developing and
propounding ideas and data in research or application is also a
scientist. The holding of a formal qualification is not a prerequisite
for a person to be a scientist.
Article
3: Where is
science produced
Scientific research can
be carried
out anywhere at all, for example, at a place of work, during a formal
course of
education, during a sponsored academic programme, in groups, or as an
individual at home conducting independent inquiry.
Article
4: Freedom of
choice of
research theme
Many scientists working
for higher
research degrees or in other research programmes at academic
institutions such as universities and colleges of advanced study, are
prevented from working upon
a research theme of their own choice by senior academic and/or
administrative officials, not for lack of support facilities but
instead because the academic hierarchy and/or other officials simply do
not approve of the line of inquiry owing to its potential to upset
mainstream dogma, favoured theories, or
the funding of other projects that might be discredited by the proposed
research. The authority of the orthodox
majority is quite often evoked to scuttle a research project so that
authority
and budgets are not upset. This commonplace practice is a deliberate
obstruction to free scientific thought, is unscientific in the extreme,
and is criminal. It cannot be tolerated.
A scientist working for
any academic
institution, authority or agency, is to be completely free as to choice
of a research theme, limited only by the material support and
intellectual
skills able to be offered by the educational institution, agency or
authority. If a scientist
carries out research as a member of a collaborative group, the research
directors and team leaders shall be limited to advisory and consulting
roles in relation to choice of a relevant research theme by a scientist
in the group.
Article
5: Freedom of
choice of
research methods
It is frequently the case
that
pressure is brought to bear upon a scientist by administrative
personnel or senior academics in relation to a research programme
conducted within an academic environment, to force a scientist to adopt
research methods other than
those the scientist has chosen, for no reason other than personal
preference, bias, institutional policy, editorial dictates, or
collective authority. This practice, which is quite widespread, is a
deliberate denial of freedom of
thought and cannot be permitted.
A non-commercial or
academic
scientist has the right to develop a research theme in any reasonable
way and by any reasonable means he considers to be most effective. The
final decision on how the research will be conducted is to be made by
the scientist alone.
If a non-commercial or
academic
scientist works as a member of a collaborative non-commercial or
academic team of scientists the project leaders and research directors
shall have only advisory and consulting rights and shall not otherwise
influence, mitigate or constrain the research
methods or research theme of a scientist within the group.
Article
6: Freedom of
participation
and collaboration in research
There is a significant
element of
institutional rivalry in the practice of modern science, concomitant
with elements of personal envy and the preservation of reputation
at all costs, irrespective of the scientific realities. This has
often led to scientists being prevented from enlisting the assistance
of competent colleagues located at rival institutions
or others without any academic affiliation. This practice
is too a deliberate obstruction to scientific progress.
If a non-commercial
scientist
requires the assistance of another person and that other person is so
agreed,
the scientist is at liberty to invite that person to lend any and all
assistance, provided the assistance is within an associated research
budget. If the assistance is independent of budget considerations
the scientist is at
liberty to engage the assisting person at his sole discretion, free of
any interference whatsoever by any other person whomsoever.
Article
7: Freedom of
disagreement
in scientific discussion
Owing to furtive jealousy
and vested
interest, modern science abhors open discussion and wilfully banishes
those scientists who question the orthodox views. Very often,
scientists of outstanding ability, who point out deficiencies in
current
theory or interpretation of data, are labelled as crackpots, so that
their views can be conveniently ignored. They are derided publicly and
privately and are systematically barred
from scientific conventions, seminars and colloquia so that their ideas
cannot find an audience. Deliberate falsification of data and
misrepresentation of theory are now frequent tools of
the unscrupulous in the suppression of facts, both technical and
historical. International committees of
scientific miscreants have been formed and these committees host and
direct international conventions at which only their acolytes are
permitted to present papers, irrespective of the quality of the
content. These committees extract large sums of money from the public
purse to fund their sponsored projects, by resort to deception and lie.
Any objection to their proposals on scientific
grounds is silenced by any means at their disposal, so that money
can continue to flow into their project accounts, and guarantee them
well-paid jobs. Opposing scientists have been sacked at their
behest; others have been prevented from securing academic appointments
by a network of corrupt accomplices. In other situations some have
been expelled from candidature in higher degree programmes such as
the PhD, for expressing ideas that undermine a fashionable theory,
however longstanding that orthodox theory might be. The fundamental
fact that no scientific theory is definite and
inviolable, and is therefore open to discussion and re-examination,
they thoroughly ignore. So too do they ignore the fact that a
phenomenon may have a number of plausible explanations, and
maliciously discredit any explanation that does not accord with
orthodox opinion, resorting without demur to the use
of unscientific arguments to justify their biased opinions.
All scientists shall be
free to
discuss their research and the research of others without fear of
public or private materially groundless ridicule, or be accused,
disparaged, impugned or otherwise discredited by unsubstantiated
allegations. No scientist shall be put in a position by which
livelihood or reputation will be at risk owing to
expression of a scientific opinion. Freedom of scientific expression
shall be paramount. The use of authority in rebuttal of a
scientific argument is not
scientific and shall not be used to gag, suppress, intimidate,
ostracise, or otherwise
coerce or bar a scientist. Deliberate suppression of scientific
facts or arguments either by act or omission, and the deliberate
doctoring of data to support an argument or to discredit an opposing
view is scientific fraud, amounting to a scientific crime.
Principles of evidence shall guide all
scientific discussion, be that evidence physical or theoretical or a
combination thereof.
Article
8: Freedom to
publish scientific results
A deplorable censorship
of
scientific papers has now become the standard practice of the editorial
boards of major journals and electronic archives, and their bands
of alleged expert referees. The referees are for the most part
protected by anonymity so that an author cannot verify their alleged
expertise. Papers are now routinely rejected
if the author disagrees with or contradicts preferred theory and the
mainstream
orthodoxy. Many papers are now rejected automatically by virtue of the
appearance in the author list of a particular scientist who has not
found favour with the editors, the referees, or other expert censors,
without any regard whatsoever for the contents of the paper. There
is a blacklisting of dissenting scientists and this list is
communicated
between participating editorial boards. This all amounts
to gross bias and a culpable suppression of free thinking, and are
to be condemned
by the international scientific community.
All scientists shall have
the right
to present their scientific research results, in whole or in part, at
relevant scientific conferences, and to publish the same in printed
scientific journals, electronic archives, and any other media. No
scientist shall have their papers
or reports rejected when submitted for publication in scientific
journals, electronic archives, or other media, simply because their
work questions current majority opinion, conflicts with the views of
an editorial board, undermines the bases of other current or planned
research projects by other scientists, is in conflict with any
political dogma or religious creed, or the
personal opinion of another, and no scientist shall be blacklisted or
otherwise censured and prevented from publication by any other
person whomsoever. No scientist shall block, modify, or otherwise
interfere with the publication of a scientist's work in the promise
of any presents or other bribes
whatsoever.
Article
9: Co-authoring
of
scientific papers
It is a poorly kept
secret in
scientific circles that many co-authors of research papers actually
have little or nothing to do with the research reported therein. Many
supervisors of graduate students, for instance, are not averse to
putting their names to
papers written by those persons who are but nominally working under
their supervision. In many such cases, the person who actually
writes the paper has an intellect superior to the nominal supervisor.
In other situations, again for
the purposes of notoriety, reputation, money, prestige, and the like,
non-participating persons are included in a paper as co-author. The
actual authors of such papers can only object at risk of being
subsequently penalised in some way, or even being expelled from
candidature for their higher research
degree or from the research team, as the case may be. Many have
actually been
expelled under such circumstances. This appalling practice cannot be
tolerated. Only those persons
responsible for the research should be accredited authorship.
No scientist shall invite
another
person to be included and no scientist shall allow their name to be
included as a co-author of a scientific paper if they did not
significantly contribute to the research reported in the paper.
No scientist shall allow himself or herself
to be coerced by any representative of an academic institution,
corporation, government agency, or any other person, to include
their name as a co-author concerning research they did not
significantly contribute to, and no scientist
shall allow their name to be used as co-author in exchange for any
presents or other bribes. No person shall induce or attempt to
induce a scientist in howsoever a way to allow that scientist's
name to be included as a co-author of
a scientific paper concerning matters to which they did not
significantly contribute.
Article
10: Independence
of
affiliation
Many scientists are now
employed
under short-term contracts. With the termination of the employment
contract, so too is the academic affiliation. It is often the policy of
editorial boards that persons without an academic or commercial
affiliation will not be
published. In the absence of affiliation many resources are not
available to the scientist, and opportunities to present talks and
papers at conferences are reduced. This is a vicious practice that must
be stopped. Science does not recognise affiliation.
No scientist shall be
prevented from
presenting papers at conferences, colloquia or seminars, from
publication in any media, from access to academic libraries or
scientific publications, from attending scientific meetings, or
from giving lectures, for want of an
affiliation with an academic institution, scientific institute,
government or commercial laboratory, or any other organisation.
Article
11: Open access
to
scientific information
Most specialised books on
scientific
matters and many scientific journals render little or no profit so that
commercial publishers are unwilling to publish them without a
contribution of money from academic institutions, government agencies,
philanthropic foundations, and the like. Under such
circumstances commercial publishers should allow free access to
electronic versions of the publications, and strive to keep the cost of
the printed materials to a minimum.
All scientists shall
strive to ensure that their research papers are available to the
international scientific community free of charge, or in the
alternative, if it cannot be avoided, at minimum cost. All scientists
should take active measures to make their
technical books available at the lowest possible cost so that
scientific information can be available to the wider international
scientific community.
Article
12: Ethical
responsibility
of scientists
History testifies that
scientific
discoveries are used for ends both good and evil, for the benefit of
some and the destruction of others. Since the progress of science and
technology cannot stop, some means for the containment of malevolent
application should be
established. Only a democratically elected government, free of
religious, racial and other bias, can safeguard civilisation. Only
democratically elected government, tribunals and committees can
safeguard the right of free scientific
creation. Today, various undemocratic states and totalitarian regimes
conduct active research into nuclear physics, chemistry, virology,
genetic engineering, etc in order to produce nuclear, chemical and
biological weapons. No scientist should willingly collaborate with
undemocratic states or totalitarian regimes. Any scientist coerced
into work on the development of weapons for such states
should find ways and means to slow the progress of research programmes
and to reduce
scientific output so that civilisation and democracy can ultimately
prevail.
All scientists bear a
moral
responsibility for their scientific creations and discoveries. No
scientist shall willingly engage in the design or construction
of weapons of any sort whatsoever for undemocratic states or
totalitarian regimes or allow his or her scientific skills and
knowledge to be applied to the development of anything whatsoever
injurious to Mankind. A scientist shall live by the dictum
that all undemocratic government and the violation of human
rights is crime.
Dmitri
Rabounski,
Editor-in-Chief
Progress in Physics
November
22, 2005
|
