Guttenberg plagiarism affair

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg (February 2011)

The Guttenberg plagiarism affair and Guttenberg affair dealt with plagiarism in the dissertation of the former German Federal Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg . The plagiarism was discussed publicly from February 2011 and led to the loss of his doctorate and his resignation within two weeks .

A commission from the University of Bayreuth , whose law faculty in Guttenberg received her doctorate , found Guttenberg's intent to deceive due to the nature and extent of the plagiarism in May 2011. The public prosecutor in Hof recognized criminally relevant copyright violations in 23 text passages . In November 2011, she closed the investigation against a payment requirement of 20,000 euros to be paid to a non-profit organization.

prehistory

Title of the dissertation Constitution and Constitutional Treaty

Guttenberg studied law at the University of Bayreuth from 1992 to 1999 . Because of his first state examination with the overall grade “ satisfactory ”, he needed a special permit (so-called dispensation) for a doctoral procedure. According to the doctoral regulations, Guttenberg had to present at least two seminar certificates rated “good”. The then dean of his faculty, Karl-Georg Loritz , gave him permission .

Guttenberg reportedly worked from around 2000 to 2007 on his dissertation on the subject of the constitution and the constitutional treaty . His supervising doctoral supervisor was Peter Häberle , the second reviewer was Rudolf Streinz . After his oral doctoral examination on February 27, 2007, Guttenberg received the overall grade summa cum laude . Following an application for a provisional title, he was allowed to use the academic degree " Doctor of Law " provisionally from May 7, 2007 and officially from January 28, 2009 after submitting 60 deposit copies .

On February 25, 2011, Der Tagesspiegel reported that Guttenberg was a member of the Rhön-Klinikum -AG supervisory board from 1996 to 2002 . His family held a large stake in the company during this time. The Rhön-Klinikum-AG had confirmed that between 1999 and 2006, around 750,000 euros had been paid to the University of Bayreuth to finance a new chair in medical management at the Faculty of Law and Economics. On the same day, the university said: This sum paid was not sponsorship , but rather "start-up financing" as part of a five-year cooperation agreement between Rhön-Klinikum-AG, a health insurance company and the Free State of Bavaria. For this purpose, the University of Rhön-Klinikum-AG kept up to fifteen places available annually between 1998 and 2003.

Plagiarism finds

Overview of the pages with and without plagiarism in the GuttenPlag Wiki

In summer 2010, while researching his own dissertation on constitutional law in Guttenberg's doctoral thesis, the Münster doctoral student Michael Schwarz came across four passages of a familiar text that he was familiar with and then wrote a critical essay on them. Due to the political sensitivity of the plagiarism allegation and on the advice of his doctoral supervisor, Schwarz decided to wait until summer 2011 to publish the article. His discovery was therefore only known after the beginning of the Guttenberg plagiarism affair.

On February 12, 2011, Andreas Fischer-Lescano , a legal scholar at the University of Bremen , found passages from nine sources when reviewing the dissertation for a review, most of which had been taken over from other publications verbatim and without references. Among other things, he found press articles as unidentified sources by checking conspicuously worded partial quotations from Guttenberg's work with the Google search for their origin. He judged these plagiarisms to be a violation of the doctoral regulations of the University of Bayreuth and informed them and the two reviewers of the dissertation. He also contacted Roland Preuss, an editor of the Süddeutsche Zeitung . Together with his colleague Tanjev Schultz, he published the allegations on February 16, 2011 in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, including an initial statement by Guttenberg, thus triggering the affair. A few days later, Fischer-Lescano's review appeared in the legal journal Kritische Justiz, which he co-edited . He documented the plagiarism by juxtaposing Guttenberg's text passages with the original texts.

On the same day, a doctoral student who had remained anonymous found out that the introduction had largely been copied. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) and the Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported shortly on this newly found plagiarism, one of a FAZ article of political scientist Barbara Zehnpfennig 1997 came. Felix E. Müller , editor-in-chief of the NZZ am Sonntag , stated on the same day that Guttenberg had taken over 97 lines from an NZZ am Sonntag article from 2003 with the exception of one word and therefore deliberately, not inadvertently, omitted the source. He had to admit this and apologize personally. The following day the author of the plagiarized NZZ am Sonntag text, Klara Obermüller, also called for this .

On February 17, 2011, the anonymous doctoral student mentioned above founded the online platform GuttenPlag Wiki in order to enable voluntary researchers on the Internet to conduct a coordinated joint search for further plagiarism by Guttenberg and their timely documentation. This website quickly developed into the central point of contact for plagiarism seekers and journalists.

On February 19, 2011, the Süddeutsche Zeitung documented on a full page using facsimiles that Guttenberg had used at least 19 authors without clearly marking them. Other media reported that Guttenberg, as a member of the Bundestag , commissioned several reports from the Scientific Service of the German Bundestag between October 2003 and October 2005 and then included them in his dissertation in large parts and without specific sources, although members of the Bundestag only used these services as part of their mandate-related work may use.

On the afternoon of February 21, 2011 the GuttenPlag Wiki published a first interim report: Plagiarized text passages were found on 271 pages of the doctoral thesis. This means that a total of 21.5 percent of the doctoral thesis (based on lines) is identified as plagiarism. This should not be explained as a mistake, but only as a planned procedure.

On February 25, 2011 the GuttenPlag Wiki documented that Guttenberg's passages from a strategy paper of the European Commission of November 5, 2003 were almost unchanged and without quotation in his 2004 article for the CSU-affiliated Hanns Seidel Foundation “Relations between Turkey and the EU - a 'privileged partnership' ”.

On February 28, 2011, a seventh expert opinion became known that Guttenberg had taken from the scientific service of the Bundestag into his dissertation without mentioning this source in a footnote or in the bibliography. On March 1, 2011, after Guttenberg's resignation, the GuttenPlag Wiki published a second interim report on his dissertation, according to which plagiarism was found on 324 of 393 pages (82 percent) of the main text. By April 6, 2011, plagiarism had been discovered on 94.14 percent of all pages of the main text, including 29 plagiarism (234 lines as copied footnotes) from a standard work by his doctoral supervisor Peter Häberle.

On December 3, 2011 it became known that zu Guttenberg, in the article "Relations between Turkey and the EU - a 'privileged partnership", which had already been identified as plagiarism in February 2011, used unmarked material as in his doctoral thesis by the Scientific Service of the Bundestag would have.

Reactions

Guttenberg

On February 16, 2011 Guttenberg declared in Berlin: “The accusation that my doctoral thesis is plagiarism is absurd.” He was “happy to check whether, with over 1200 footnotes and 475 pages, individual footnotes should not be set or incorrectly set would take this into account in a new edition ”. He also emphasized: “And if someone should come up with the idea of ​​claiming that employees in my offices were involved in the scientific development of my dissertation, I will see that this is not the case. The preparation of this work was my own achievement. "

On February 18, 2011 Guttenberg declared unannounced in front of some journalists “selected” according to his spokesman, that his dissertation was “not plagiarism”. It contains “unquestionably errors”; However, he “never deliberately deceived or deliberately failed to identify the authorship”. The University of Bayreuth is responsible for checking the errors. "I will of course actively help to determine to what extent this could be a scientific, I emphasize scientific misconduct . And I will be happy to temporarily, I emphasize temporarily, not using the title until the result of this test, but only until then, after which I would use it again. "

At the same time, many journalists awaited his statement at the federal press conference. They left the hall closed in protest when a ministry spokesman informed them of Guttenberg's declaration at the ministry, but not of its content. Conference leader Werner Gößling wrote a protest letter to him. Guttenberg later apologized for his actions.

On February 21, 2011 Guttenberg wrote to the University of Bayreuth requesting that he withdraw his doctorate. He used the official letterhead of the Federal Minister of Defense. In the evening he admitted "serious mistakes" at a CDU election campaign event and declared that he would no longer have his doctorate degree permanently. He "possibly [...] lost track of the sources at one point or another". He also said: "I did not make these mistakes consciously, nor did I consciously or deliberately deceive in any form." He ruled out resigning as defense minister.

On February 23, 2011 he admitted in the regular question time in the Bundestag that he had “written a very flawed doctoral thesis”. He had “haughty” believed that he could reconcile family, political and scientific requirements, but failed because of this “ squaring the circle ”. The “accusation that the work is plagiarism” is “absurd” because it “neither deliberately nor deliberately deceived”. Corresponding allegations against him could "carry criminal relevance in themselves" as defamation . When submitting his doctoral thesis, he had " made a declaration of honor ", but no word of honor . He “wrote this doctoral thesis personally”. He “currently” had four reports from the Scientific Service, which he had “used as a primary source” and “appropriately designated sources”. He also used a translation service provided by the German Bundestag. All of these elaborations were made for "mandate-related reasons" and he only used them later for his doctoral thesis. He continues to claim "to be able to act as a role model - also when it comes to admitting and confessing mistakes". With his request to withdraw the doctoral degree, he had sent "the right signal" for the German academic sector, "that if you have recognized mistakes yourself, you will take the stated consequence".

In the following current hour , requested by the opposition, Guttenberg repeated that he had "not deliberately and deliberately deceived". This time he accepted accusations of fraud and impostors from opposition politicians without a reply.

media

Some commentators already rated the first plagiarism found as a deliberate attempt at fraud. Only in some places where it was found, but not in the introductory passages, could one suspect “insufficient care”. The Lippe-Zeitung pointed on 17 February 2011 as the first to the case of Andreas Kasper (CDU Landesverband Lippe ) 2010, which the CDU had otherwise crowded than Guttenberg to withdraw immediately. Prosecution took place here in the public interest. Various commentators called Guttenberg " baron of lies" and assessed his statement of February 21 as a "lie" and "mockery of the electorate".

University of Bayreuth

Peter Häberle commented on the work of his doctoral student on February 16, 2011: “The accusation is absurd, the work is not plagiarism. [...] It was checked in detail by me in numerous consultations. "

Diethelm Klippel , Ombudsman of the Commission for “Self-Regulation in Science” at the University of Bayreuth, initiated an investigation on February 16, 2011. The members of the commission include Professors Stephan Rixen , Nuri Aksel , Wiebke Putz-Osterloh and Paul Rösch .

On February 17, 2011, University President Rüdiger Bormann publicly called on Guttenberg to comment on the allegations within two weeks. After Guttenberg's request to withdraw his doctoral degree on February 21, 2011, Bormann stated that Guttenberg's voluntary waiver of the degree did not release his university from intensively examining the plagiarism allegations without any time pressure.

On February 23, 2011, Bormann announced that the university would now revoke Guttenberg's doctorate . Contrary to the doctoral regulations of his university, he did not fully state the literature and other resources used, did not identify literally or almost literally parts of the literature and admitted this himself. The doctoral committee unanimously stated that he had thereby violated his academic obligations and the principles of academic work “to a considerable extent”. On the basis of Section 48 of the Administrative Procedure Act , the doctoral degree could and must be withdrawn from him without evidence of a possible intention to deceive. The Bavarian Ministry of Science, Research and Art, as the university’s legal supervisory authority, had checked this procedure and confirmed it as legally “watertight”. The fact that Guttenberg had admitted the plagiarism simplified the legal situation. The procedure already initiated by the commission “Self-regulation in science” remains unaffected.

This should further examine the central question, without specifying a deadline, whether Guttenberg deliberately deceived the doctoral committee with the proven plagiarism in his dissertation. This can include criminal copyright infringement.

The Bayreuth constitutional lawyer Oliver Lepsius , successor to the chair of Guttenberg's doctoral supervisor Häberle, declared on February 25, 2011: “We have been caught by a fraudster. It is an unrivaled audacity how he betrayed honorable persons at the university. ”Lepsius stated that the minister had“ lost reality ”. The “political dimension of the scandal” lies in the fact that Guttenberg compiled plagiarism “according to plan and systematically” and then claimed that he “did not know what he was doing”.

On February 28, 2011, Häberle publicly moved away from his initial assessment: "The unimaginable deficiencies discovered in Mr. zu Guttenberg's doctoral thesis are serious and unacceptable."

The image film of the law faculty, which contained passages with Guttenberg, was removed from the website for revision.

CDU / CSU

On the morning of February 21, 2011, Chancellor Angela Merkel said :

“I have not appointed a scientific assistant or a doctoral candidate or a doctoral thesis holder, but rather my work as Federal Defense Minister. He does it excellently, and that's what counts for me. "

Bundestag President Norbert Lammert stated on February 22, 2011 that Guttenberg's first press release on the allegations was “not a convincing contribution to solving the problem”. He had unapproved and incorrectly used the work of the scientific service of the Bundestag and thus violated parliamentary and scientific rules. Lammert informed the Bundestag's council of elders about this on February 24, 2011. The fact that Guttenberg concealed the unauthorized use of six Bundestag reports in his dissertation was "depressingly clear". On February 25, 2011, Lammert accused opposition representatives of having failed to ask Guttenberg on February 23, 2011, for example, how many mistakes he had found in his work. The affair is "a coffin nail for confidence in our democracy". According to other reports, however, this statement referred to a vote by the Bild newspaper on Guttenberg's appointment.

From February 22 to March 1, 2011, some CDU / CSU representatives publicly criticized Guttenberg without demanding that he resign; some suggested this to him. This is how Bernhard Vogel called Guttenberg's explanation of his plagiarism "difficult to understand". Wolfgang Böhmer considered his behavior as a doctoral student “neither legitimate nor honorable”. Annette Schavan explained that as a doctoral student she was “not only secretly” ashamed of him. Günther Beckstein told the " Stern ": "If it turns out that Guttenberg said something untrue in office or in front of the Bundestag, he would have to resign". Kurt Biedenkopf criticized Merkel: There is no separation between person and office. At the beginning of the affair he would have recommended Guttenberg to “step back into the ranks”. Thomas Goppel had declared the plagiarism allegations to be correct on February 22, 2011, but made the doctoral supervisor jointly responsible for inaccurate checking. On the morning of March 1st, Goppel declared that Guttenberg had to decide for himself and “know what he can expect from us”.

Government spokesman Steffen Seibert confirmed on February 28, 2011 that the Federal Chancellor believed Guttenberg had not deliberately cheated. The Bayreuth exam has to be awaited: "Then you can talk about a fact."

FDP

For the FDP , the MP Stephan Thomae Guttenberg called on February 23, 2011 in the Bundestag to “refute” the allegations of plagiarism and to dispel “last doubts”. Burkhardt Müller-Sönksen gave Guttenberg's explanations and steps afterwards sufficient.

Wolfgang Kubicki, on the other hand, requested on February 21, 2011 that Guttenberg be dismissed as minister until the allegations were clarified. On February 27 and 28, 2011, Martin Neumann demanded that Guttenberg must dispel the allegations or resign within a maximum of two weeks. Katja Suding demanded that Guttenberg should "draw the consequences" for his deliberate misconduct as a doctoral student, which he had tried to cover up. FDP General Secretary Christian Lindner rejected these demands as not representative of the FDP.

Opposition parties

Representatives of the opposition parties suggested that Guttenberg resign from February 17, 2011 if his doctorate was revoked as a result of plagiarism. After a press comment, Jürgen Trittin (Greens) called him “Doctor Googleberg” and warned that he could “not belittle the plagiarism as cheating”.

From February 18, opposition members accused Guttenberg of abuse of office because of his use of reports from the scientific service . Thomas Oppermann (SPD) suspected that Guttenberg had used a ghostwriter from the Bundestag administration; one must check whether he “wrote his doctorate at the taxpayer's expense”. However, the Council of Elders rejected a request for an immediate formal examination of the process with the votes of the coalition majority and initially postponed the topic.

In the Bundestag debate on February 23, opposition speakers called for his resignation as defense minister and, in addition to his plagiarism and his handling of it, also criticized his use of letterheads by the ministry with reference to the letterhead affair of 1992, as a result of which the then Federal Minister of Economics and Vice Chancellor Jürgen Möllemann resigned from his office had resigned. In the course of the debate, Oppermann and Trittin referred to Guttenberg as “academic impostor and liar”, “ Felix Krull ” and “fraudster”. Neither the Bundestag presidium nor coalition representatives rejected this. This criticized the allegations only as “prejudice” Guttenberg, “destruction of the political opponent at any price” and “unworthy hunt”.

Scientists and associations

Seventy lecturers at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich called on the Bavarian Science Minister Wolfgang Heubisch in an open letter on February 22, 2011 to counter the impression that Guttenberg's behavior was “a peculiar offense like parking the wrong way […] which is common in science everywhere be ”and in the discussion about it just a“ dirt campaign ”or just a“ politically motivated attack from the far left ”.

In a statement on February 23, 2011, the chairman of the Philosophical Faculty Conference, Prof. Gerhard Wolf, criticized the fact that attempts to deceive in examination procedures and the importance of declarations on honor and affidavits were being trivialized in the public discussion and that “a dwindling awareness of wrongdoing in the event of violations of the requirement of academic honesty lasting damage to the good international reputation of Germany as a location for science ”.

The President of the German University Association, Bernhard Kempen, described the "marginalization of scientific misconduct by the highest representatives of our state" as outrageous. He protested against the disrespect with which "the importance of science and its iron laws is politically belittled". Norman Weiss, Chairman of the Thesis Network for Doctoral Candidates, reported that many doctoral students feared devaluation of their doctorate. The Science Council saw the general reputation of German research threatened. Its chairman Wolfgang Marquardt criticized: "There can be no successful science without careful handling of sources, without an unmistakable distinction between foreign and own knowledge [...]."

Andreas Fischer-Lescano criticized that the University of Bayreuth did not base the withdrawal of the doctoral degree on the special norm of its doctoral regulations, but only on general administrative law. This is a legally inadmissible attempt to circumvent the recognition of intent to deceive, which is mandatory according to the special standard. The Frankfurt law professor Günter Frankenberg pointed out that judgments of the highest courts have repeatedly confirmed comparable citation errors in dissertations as a deception. In a declaration on the standards of academic examinations initiated by the Bonn mathematics professor Matthias Kreck and signed by around 3300 university professors, it was also criticized that the University of Bayreuth did not check the intent to deceive immediately before withdrawing the doctorate.

In an open letter dated February 24, 2011 with the title Causa Guttenberg - Open letter from doctoral students to the Federal Chancellor , doctoral students accused Guttenberg of “massive, systematic deception” and Chancellor Merkel of “mocking all academic assistants and all doctoral students”. The open letter had been signed online by more than 60,000 people by March 1, 2011.

Ernst-Ludwig Winnacker , the former President of the German Research Foundation (DFG), criticized the behavior of zu Guttenberg and the trivialization of his actions: "We researchers cannot lock anyone up, only a judge can do that, but the penalty of science is that one is responsible for is always in the pillory. ”“ People who do something like that are done in science. ” Matthias Kleiner , President of the DFG, also warned against trivializing plagiarism:“ Researchers share their ideas and findings with one another and often lead them together, continue. But they don't steal it. "

The President of the German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina , Jörg Hacker , stated: "Dishonest procedures in the preparation of scientific papers represent an act that lacks respect for science and its elementary principles."

The German Cultural Council expressed on 27 February 2011, the concern that "by the Causa Guttenberg piracy of copyrighted works on the Internet even more increases" and criticized the Chancellor at their "consuming copied Defense Minister" hold fast.

armed forces

Rainer Elkar , emeritus professor at the University of the Federal Armed Forces in Munich , declared on February 21, 2011: Anyone who demands something from his subordinates that he is unable to do is not suitable for leadership. It could not be that he “just gives back his doctorate on the side and believes that this is the end of it”. Guttenberg is the superior of the employees of the two universities of the Bundeswehr and therefore now "not acceptable as a defense minister".

On February 24, 2011, the chairman of the Bundeswehr Association, Ulrich Kirsch, supported in an interview that Guttenberg would remain in office, but declared his credibility to be “scratched” and his crisis management to be “not optimal”. For a successful Bundeswehr reform it is "absolutely necessary that he prevails against the savings targets of the finance minister". An ongoing debate about the minister is damaging the upcoming restructuring of the army.

resignation

On March 1, 2011 Guttenberg announced his resignation as Defense Minister in front of journalists in the Defense Ministry:

“If it is only about my person on the backs of the soldiers, I can no longer answer for that. [...] Like everyone else, I have to admit my weaknesses and mistakes. And it was always important to me not to hide this from the public. [...] to writing my doctoral thesis. [...] The tremendous impact of the medial consideration of my person - to which I have contributed a lot - but also the quality of the discussion do not remain without effect on myself and my family. [...] It is (but) no longer possible for me to meet the expectations placed on me. […] I was always ready to fight, but I have reached the limit of my strength. Many thanks."

Guttenberg's reason for resignation met with some criticism. Michael Konken , chairman of the German Association of Journalists, said: "To want to blame the media for your misconduct is perfidious." Claudia Roth , chairman of the Greens, called it "indecent that Guttenberg tried to the last to his plagiarism affair and to play off the well-being of the soldiers up to and including the soldiers killed in Afghanistan ”. The initiators of the GuttenPlag Wiki stated: "We regret that when he announced his resignation, Mr. zu Guttenberg did not find any clear words about the apparent intent to deceive and about the authorship of the dissertation."

Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel accepted Guttenberg's resignation on March 1, 2011 "with regret", and the President dismissed him from his ministerial office on March 3. In the afternoon of that day Guttenberg renounced his parliamentary mandate as announced and gave up the chairmanship of the CSU district of Upper Franconia. On April 15, 2011 Guttenberg also resigned his mandate in the Kulmbach district council “for professional reasons”.

Other effects

Survey Results

According to a survey by Infratest dimap on February 23, 73 percent of 1,000 respondents - 5 percent more than on February 3 - were satisfied with Guttenberg's political work; 72 percent wanted to remain in the office of defense minister. In a Forsa poll on the same day, 73 percent were in favor of remaining in office; 50 percent - 9 percent less than at the beginning of February - thought it was straightforward and credible. At the end of February, 47 percent of those surveyed by Forsa thought it was straightforward, 34 percent credible, and 26 percent exemplary.

In online surveys of major daily newspapers on February 24, majorities of 55 to 85 percent were in favor of Guttenberg's resignation, but in representative telephone surveys predominantly majorities were against.

In a quick poll by infratest dimap on March 1, 2011, 53 percent, and on the following day 60 percent of those surveyed believed Guttenberg's resignation to be correct. Guttenberg's complete resignation from politics rejected 72 percent. According to a Forsa survey on March 9, 69 percent of those questioned saw the resignation as correct, 62 percent as a result of their own mistakes. 62 percent also wanted Guttenberg to make a political comeback in the foreseeable future.

In the ZDF Politbarometer of April 15, 2011 Guttenberg fell back to fourth place among the most popular German politicians.

Demonstrations

Around 400 people took part in a “protest against the dishonorable behavior of the Defense Minister, the Chancellor and the government factions in the Bundestag” on February 26, 2011, showing “the baron of lies” and leaving their shoes on the fence of the Defense Ministry. They took over a gesture that expresses deep contempt among Arabs and alluded to the protests in the Arab world 2010-2011 .

Guttenberg's supporters had set up solidarity pages on Facebook , where they called for rallies for him after his resignation. Despite around 500,000 votes in favor, only dozens to hundreds of people took part in some large cities on March 5, including Guttenberg critics with ironic statements on protest posters. The Hedonist International had registered the Hamburg demonstration itself. Other of these events were canceled due to lack of interest. In Guttenberg (Upper Franconia) over 1,500 participants demonstrated for the politician; while his father Enoch zu Guttenberg, as a speaker, described the media reports on the affair as a "manhunt".

On March 22, 2011 Guttenberg thanked his Facebook followers with a video.

20 to 30 German doctoral students there protested publicly against a speech by Guttenberg at Yale University on November 7, 2011 by demonstratively leaving the event room. Over 100 students and professors there protested with an online petition against a speech planned for January 22, 2013 by Guttenberg at Dartmouth College , New Hampshire, USA. The organizer of the protest, German studies professor Veronika Fuechtner , was outraged that Guttenberg had never seriously apologized for his plagiarism. He therefore does not belong in an academic environment. Guttenberg canceled the speech.

Guttenberg's apologies

According to reports from March 12, 2011 Guttenberg apologized by letter to some of the authors of the texts he had plagiarized, especially to the authors of the reports of the Scientific Bundestag Service. By April 12, three addressees confirmed receipt of a written apology.

Examination Board

After Guttenberg's resignation on March 1, 2011, University President Rüdiger Bormann stated that the University of Bayreuth expected Guttenberg to help clarify the questions relating to his dissertation, as he had repeatedly announced. On March 3, 2011, an unnamed member of the "Self-Control in Science" examination committee is said to have said: "What Guttenberg did is deception in the sense of what the administrative courts have ruled so far."

On March 3, 2011, Volker Rieble , expert on scientific plagiarism and professor of labor law and civil law at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, questioned the right of the University of Bayreuth to examine Guttenberg's culpability and to publicly state that it had the necessary disciplinary power external or former doctoral students are missing. Only a public prosecutor's investigation initiated after a criminal complaint by an original author could justify a review of the work for copyright infringement.

On March 11, 2011, the university appointed Wolfgang Löwer , spokesman for the ombudsmen of the German Research Foundation (DFG), and Jürgen Mittelstraß , director of the Philosophy and Philosophy Center in Constance, to the examination committee as external experts . Their final decision was announced for April. Löwer had already stated on February 16 that there were no "consistent oversights" in the case of missing sources.

According to a report in the Süddeutsche Zeitung on April 8, 2011, the examination committee came to the conclusion that Guttenberg had deliberately written off with intent to deceive. On the same day, Bormann announced that Guttenberg's lawyers had asked the university not to publish the results of the commission. They wanted to make it known, however, because there was "a very strong public interest " in how the university assessed the incident. Guttenberg had been asked for support in a letter. The report will only appear in May with his consent, as it is formally an internal process. Bormann saw Guttenberg's behavior as a "complete contradiction" to his resignation speech, in which he had promised to help clear up the allegations.

Guttenberg's lawyer Alexander Graf von Kalckreuth criticized the reports on the results of the investigation as a “prejudice” of his client. Guttenberg's earlier written statement shows "conclusively that he did not deliberately deceive". However, he admits "lack of care". The accusation of insufficient participation in the investigation is "baseless". It is unclear whether Guttenberg will agree to the publication of the commission report, since an investigation is still ongoing.

University representatives such as Bernhard Kempen, Matthias Kleiner and Margret Wintermantel criticized this approach. Chancellor Angela Merkel said she expected Guttenberg to keep his promise to help with the investigation. Klara Obermüller called it “very undemocratic” that he was apparently trying to claim a special right. Erwin Huber , former CSU party leader, demanded that Guttenberg should “work constructively and without any legal finesse in clearing up all allegations. He also owes that to his friends and followers. ”Publication is essential,“ secret papers ”are not needed.

On April 13, Guttenberg agreed, according to statements by his lawyers, to publish the Commission's report.

The examination committee announced its results to Guttenberg and gave him until April 26th to comment. In a written statement that became known on April 16, Guttenberg again denied deliberate action: During the years of work, he had used various data carriers, worked in short sections and lost track of things. According to a media report, Guttenberg rejected the accusation of intent in a four-page faxed statement on the audit report by April 30th and spoke of a "misunderstanding".

Publication of the audit report

On May 6, 2011, the commission announced the result of its three-month investigation: Guttenberg had "evidently grossly violated the standards of good scientific practice and deliberately deceived them". He added plagiarism throughout the work, reformulated the original texts, rearranged the sentence structure, used synonyms and left out details. This presupposes a “conscious approach” with which he has repeatedly assumed the authorship of foreign texts. The examiners of his doctoral thesis were not responsible for his misconduct, but they should have justified the top grade in more detail.

On May 11, 2011, the Commission published its full final report. In it, she first explained her task and legal basis (Part I), then her procedure (II): She asked Guttenberg in writing to comment on February 17 and 28 and April 7, and offered him a direct interview several times. He was asked to explain in detail his way of working and the occurrence of certain plagiarism sites or the “serious craftsmanship errors” he admitted. Because it is incomprehensible that a long dissertation duration and a loss of overview lead to this by themselves. He had neither taken a specific position nor accepted the offer to talk, but only communicated with the commission through a speaker and his lawyers. After four meetings (February 16, March 8 and 23 and April 7, 2011) and taking into account Guttenberg's last statement on April 26, the report was drawn up. All members had an “overview of violations of the citation rules in Mr. zu Guttenberg's dissertation” from published plagiarism finds, which they had checked through their own research. Then the report carries out the result (III): Objectively about 65 percent of the work consisted of incorrect information, namely plagiarism of wording and content contained in all parts, with which Guttenberg had passed off third-party services as his own and tried to conceal this. According to the current case law, his intent to deceive can be derived from objective evidence and particularly illustrated by his handling of the reports of the Bundestag service. It is irrelevant whether he had previously used it for lectures as a member of parliament: "... the abundance of evident cases justifies the accusation of the plagiarism of the script." He had "texts not originating from him to an unimaginable extent" in all details including the punctuation 'adopted without marking the authorship of others'. Even the quantity and distribution as well as the acceptance of the expert opinion after years of preparatory work rule out minor violations or accidental oversights; It is also incomprehensible that because of the family and work overload that he had cited as an excuse, he "fell into a state of permanent forgetfulness that he was completely oblivious to the false information that could be proven everywhere in his work". Rather, this declaration shows that Guttenberg deliberately disregarded his admitted excessive demands and raised "lack of care to a conscious working style". - Häberle does not share responsibility because he was also deceived (IV). He could, however, have requested the reports that Guttenberg had referred to in the bibliography. The top grade for the work is hardly understandable. The report recommends the University (VI) to demand a word of honor from all doctoral candidates, to improve their supervision and to use plagiarism software.

Reactions to the report

Walter Schmitt-Glaeser , former Vice President of the University of Bayreuth and member of the CSU, described their approach as "driven hunt": They had no right to set up an examination committee. This did not plausibly substantiate the accusation of deliberate deception. She dealt with Guttenberg differently than with other doctoral students. He is sure that he did not deliberately deceive, as he “did not need” to do so as a student he knew.

Volker Rieble, on the other hand, praised the report as “solid work”, which is the best possible evidence of Guttenberg's deliberate deception. The commission rightly spared Häberle and Streinz, since Häberle was also "more victims than perpetrators" and was punished with a loss of reputation.

In his interview book Vorerst schehlert , which appeared on November 29, 2011, Guttenberg rejected the charge of deception, held the University of Bayreuth partiality and also assumed financial motives in the decision to withdraw the doctorate. He also rejected Oliver Lepsius' accusation of fraud.

The Bavarian Science Minister Wolfgang Heubisch rejected Guttenberg's attacks and attested that the university had “carefully and independently examined”. Lepsius explained to Guttenberg's point of view: “From a legal point of view, this is absurd. He only escapes punishment because copyright law is based on financial loss. I find it unreasonable to rest on it now. We know: Not everything that is indecent is punishable. ”The University of Bayreuth referred to the legal expertise of the members of the examination committee and the external consultants, the correct legal responsibility of the committee and Guttenberg's consent to the publication of the examination report.

Investigations by the public prosecutor's office in Hof

Legally, the unmarked transfer of complete passages from another work, regardless of intent, scope and other quality of the work, is considered a deception that entitles the person to withdraw the doctorate. An administrative court ruled in 2008: Even the presence of plagiarism on several pages and by various third-party authors means a “systematic and planned adoption of foreign ideas”.

After the first criminal complaints, Chief Public Prosecutor Reiner Laib stated on February 25, 2011 that the responsible public prosecutor in Hof wanted to wait for the result of the examination by the university before initiating any criminal investigations. On March 7, 2011, Laib announced that he had initiated an investigation into more than 100 criminal charges against Guttenberg, most of them for copyright infringement.

However, authors of the plagiarized texts had not filed any criminal charges by March 10. An indictment was therefore only expected if the public prosecutor's office had affirmed a public interest in prosecution, for example because of the threat of permanent damage to copyright. Further criminal charges were filed on suspicion of infidelity , based on Guttenberg's use of the Bundestag's scientific service for private interests, as well as on suspicion of fraud in relation to illegally using the doctoral degree. Legally, they were given little chance of success. On April 12, media lawyer Butz Peters justified why he saw a public interest in Guttenberg's criminal prosecution as a given: With the amount of plagiarism found, according to the German guidelines for criminal proceedings and fine proceedings, there is “a not just minor infringement of property rights”. In addition, there is a well-founded suspicion of abuse of Bundestag services. Guttenberg's public denial of deliberate action and public protests, also from the young academics, showed that the public interest in a criminal law clarification outweighs the protection of personal rights in this case .

According to a report by Spiegel on April 12, an anonymous author of a text plagiarized by Guttenberg wanted to file a criminal complaint against him. On April 13, the President of the Bundestag, Lammert, waived without giving a reason to file a criminal complaint, which the Bundestag, as the holder of the rights, was entitled to in the case of misuse of the scientific service's work.

Chief Public Prosecutor Reiner Laib said on April 11th that the plagiarism allegations were being checked with all available sources, regardless of the university, and that an interim report would not be presented until summer 2011 at the earliest. After May 6, 2011, Laib added that the investigation report published by the Bayreuth Commission should also be included in the investigations of the Hof public prosecutor. This “external source of information will certainly be used”, but will also be determined independently of it. On November 23, 2011, the public prosecutor's office in Hof announced that they had found criminally relevant copyright violations in 23 text passages. However, there is no evidence of infidelity and fraud. According to Section 153a of the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), the investigation will be discontinued against payment of a requirement of 20,000 euros to the Deutsche KinderKrebshilfe Foundation , as the economic damage to the copyrighted authors is only marginal.

The law professor and ÖDP politician Martin Schwab from the Free University of Berlin , Dean of the Faculty of Law, considered these arguments of the public prosecutor's office to be “not convincing and their premises simply wrong”. Sonja Volkmann-Schluck, who was the only plagiarism victim who had filed Guttenberg's criminal complaint, criticized the decision as being one-sidedly based on economic aspects and reserved the right to take further legal steps.

The timing of the payment of the additional payment allowed Guttenberg to determine the date of the termination of the criminal proceedings himself and in this way achieved that the press release of the public prosecutor's office in Hof was published on the day before the appearance of his first interview after his resignation. Guttenberg again rejected intentions to fraud in this conversation: "If I had the intention to deceive, then I would never have behaved as clumsily and stupidly as is the case in some places in this work." He explained missing references with years of chaos Working method in which he collected text excerpts, revised them and later forgot whether they were his own or someone else's texts.

Role of the internet

As a result of the affair, the influence of social networks on the Internet was discussed , among other things . Many commentators emphasized that the GuttenPlag Wiki prevented the otherwise usual sitting out of the affair by providing quick and verifiable documentation of the plagiarism. This shows the growing influence of the Internet compared to conventional media. The example of Guttenplag Wiki was followed by other plagiarism searches organized on the Internet in publicly accessible academic papers, such as VroniPlag .

However, the anonymous plagiarism hunters were sharply criticized for violating the presumption of innocence and denouncing themselves. In response to this, the DFG finally banned universities from investigating anonymous plagiarism reports in 2013. Scientific whistleblower itself was also defined as scientific misconduct if the whistleblower makes the accusations publicly "without first informing the university or research institution of the suspicion of scientific misconduct", or reports them without checking or having sufficient knowledge of the facts. After this guideline again met with considerable criticism, the DFG finally allowed the publication of an accusation "in scientific journals or other forms of publication" as an alternative to the confidential procedure via the responsible bodies at a university, although the DFG still left the actual core question open, namely whether the anonymous publication of allegations on the Internet and in particular in wikis, d. H. without an expert review by a committee of technical experts (peer review), falls under this "other forms of publication" and is therefore permitted or prohibited.

Implications for Science

As a result of the affair, the contrast between academic criticism and Guttenberg's unbroken popularity, improved protection of intellectual property and doctoral procedures were discussed. Pascal Beucker saw a conflict between society population mass represented by the newspaper Bild , and the " educated middle class ", represented by the FAZ: empfänden academics Guttenberg's "lapidary dealing with a doctorate as a slap in the face". Ignoring this is a "highly dangerous, populist strategy".

According to Ulrich Schnabel , a minister fell for the first time in the Federal Republic over "angry scientist protests", which would have only demanded a duty of truth regardless of political interests. Anonymous Internet research and an open network letter from doctoral students, not scientific control mechanisms, achieved this success. Leading research associations either responded too late and only “with diaper-soft explanations” or not at all. This calls into question the ability of science to clean itself. Dissertations would now have to be checked according to uniform, strict standards.

According to Inge Kutter , individual professors should no longer select and evaluate doctoral candidates “according to their own taste and barely transparent criteria”, but rather selection committees analogous to graduate schools. This requires better financial resources for universities. She referred to Jan-Hendrik Olbertz , President of the Humboldt University in Berlin : He had welcomed the “social debate about the quality of scientific achievements” as overdue, but regretted that it was triggered by the affair, not the science.

As a lesson from the affair, university professors suggested, for example, that doctoral courses should be stipulated uniformly nationwide, that dissertations should be assessed independently of the faculty, that maximum grades should only be awarded after external review or no grades at all if doctoral students undertook to publish the reviews of the examiners with their work. Others demand that these reports should be available on the Internet for at least as long as they are available at the university.

On March 23, 2011, the parliamentary group of the Greens submitted an application for “Scientific honesty and quality assurance for doctorates”. He called on the federal government to improve the protection of intellectual property: for example, through technically up-to-date anti-plagiarism software that can be handled professionally by examiners at all universities, uniform quality standards, an obligatory affidavit for doctoral students, external experts from the faculty, anonymous peer reviews , and strengthening of graduate schools and remuneration of professors even after the doctoral supervision.

Word of the year

The verb “ guttenbergen ” was voted seventh in 2011 by the Society for German Language as word of the year . It stands as a synonym for extensive copying, copying, plagiarizing.

Historical classification

The historian Michael Philipp , who has investigated the resignations of German politicians since 1949, names the affair as unusual features: For the first time, a federal politician had to resign because of violations of a scientific ethos, quickly uncovered by Internet users, and despite continued popularity. It was not something that was scandalized, but a serious problem. Guttenberg has given up his credibility himself: someone who says of himself that he has “lost track of things” cannot lead a ministry. His initial reaction ("abstruse") was "politically fatal" because he had belittled his critics without taking their allegations seriously. His statement to a few selected journalists parallel to the Federal Press Conference was a "communication policy disaster". Even when he resigned, he said nothing about "that his dissertation is a compilation of texts by other authors", that is, "planned action that lasted for months", no mere "errors" in the sense of a mishap or slip-up. This behavior shows a "pronounced, downright grotesque loss of reality - because he considers himself unassailable and in no way compares his actions with applicable norms". Nevertheless, he will certainly return to the political stage.

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Guttenberg obtained his doctorate with special permission . Time online. February 28, 2011. Retrieved February 25, 2013.
  2. ↑ Guttenberg needed special permission for a doctorate . In: FAZ.net , March 1, 2011. Retrieved March 15, 2011. 
  3. ↑ a b Roland Preuß: Guttenberg's doctoral thesis. Summa cum laude? - "More than flattering". Süddeutsche Zeitung , February 16, 2011, accessed on March 4, 2011 .
  4. ↑ Guttenberg initially only had a doctorate degree . Time online. February 23, 2011. Retrieved March 18, 2013.
  5. ↑ 750,000 euros for the University of Bayreuth . In: Der Tagesspiegel , February 25, 2011. Retrieved April 9, 2011. 
  6. ↑ Cooperation with Rhön-Klinikum AG in the field of health economics (PDF; 66 kB; p. 2.) University of Bayreuth. February 25, 2011. Retrieved October 18, 2016.
  7. ↑ Guttenberg's doctoral thesis: A student has known for a long time . Westphalian news. February 22, 2011. Retrieved March 18, 2013.
  8. ↑ PhD student discovered possible plagiarism months ago . Munster newspaper. February 22, 2011. Retrieved March 18, 2013.
  9. ↑ a b Andreas Fischer-Lescano: Reviews (PDF; 169 kB) Critical Justice. February 2011. Retrieved March 21, 2013.
  10. ↑ Under observation . Southgerman newspaper. March 3, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  11. ↑ "I didn't want to believe it" . Time online. February 24, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  12. ^ Roland Preuss, Tanjev Schultz: Guttenbergs Fall, The scandal and its consequences for politics and society. Gütersloh 2011, p. 28f.
  13. ↑ Roland Preuss and Tanjev Schultz: Plagiarism allegation against the Defense Minister: zu Guttenberg is said to have written off his doctoral thesis . In: sueddeutsche.de , February 16, 2011. Accessed February 21, 2011. 
  14. ↑ Guttenberg could have stolen from these authors . The world. February 16, 2011. Retrieved March 21, 2013.
  15. ↑ Roland Preuß, Tanjev Schultz: Guttenbergs Fall , Gütersloh 2011, p. 43
  16. ^ Guttenberg dissertation at the beginning copied from FAZ . Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. February 16, 2011. Retrieved December 19, 2011.
  17. ↑ Swiss editor-in-chief apologizes . Focus Online. February 16, 2011. Retrieved December 19, 2011.
  18. ↑ “The minister simply helped himself to me” . World online. February 17, 2011. Retrieved December 19, 2011.
  19. ↑ Oliver Neuroth: Internet project GuttenPlag: "Swarm intelligence" in the fight against plagiarism . In: tagesschau.de , February 19, 2011. Accessed February 21, 2011. 
  20. ↑ 19 Ghostwriters against their will . Southgerman newspaper. February 18, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  21. ↑ böl / AFP / dpa: Controversial thesis: Guttenberg also copied from federal service . In: Spiegel Online . February 19, 2011. Retrieved February 22, 2011.
  22. ↑ Interim report . In: GuttenPlag Wiki . February 21, 2011. Retrieved February 21, 2011.
  23. ↑ Armin Himmelrath: Second Guttenberg work under suspicion . Mirror online. February 25, 2011. Retrieved February 25, 2011.
  24. ^ SPD wants to withdraw Guttenberg directing over Bundeswehr universities . Mirror online. February 28, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  25. ^ Second interim report from GuttenPlag Wiki , March 1, 2011
  26. ↑ GuttenPlag Wiki: Guttenberg-2006 (statistics up to April 6, 2011)
  27. ↑ GuttenPlag Wiki: Guttenberg's watering can (as of March 9, 2011)
  28. ↑ Manuel Bewarder: New plagiarism allegation against ex-Minister Guttenberg . In: Welt Online , December 3, 2011; GuttenPlag Wiki: "Explanation of the current investigation into Karl-Theodor Guttenberg's 2004 publication 'Relations between Turkey and the EU - a privileged partnership'" (December 2, 2011, 3:45 pm)
  29. ↑ Footnote dispute: Dr. Guttenberg calls plagiarism allegations absurd . In: Spiegel Online , February 16, 2011. Accessed February 21, 2011. 
  30. ↑ Plagiarism allegation against Dr. jur. Guttenberg . tagesschau.de. February 16, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012.
  31. ↑ Guttenberg snubbed journalists in the capital. Scandal in the federal press conference . Background. February 18, 2011. Retrieved January 30, 2012.
  32. ↑ Guttenberg's statement in full . Time online. February 18, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  33. ↑ Guttenberg's information policy outrages journalists . N24. February 18, 2011. Archived from the original on September 16, 2014. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  34. ↑ Plagiarism allegations: Guttenberg asks the university to withdraw the doctorate . In: Abendblatt.de , February 21, 2011. Accessed February 22, 2011. 
  35. ↑ Plagiarism affair: Guttenberg wants to forego a doctorate . In: Spiegel Online , February 19, 2011. Retrieved February 22, 2011. 
  36. ↑ a b c d Plenary minutes of the German Bundestag (PDF; 909 kB) February 23, 2011. Retrieved March 9, 2011.
  37. ↑ A ghost named Guttenberg . Mirror online. March 6, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012 .; End of a high flyer . Cicero. March 1, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012 .; Neue Westfälische (Bielefeld): Comment: At Guttenberg, perpetrator resigned, not victim THOMAS SEIM . news current. March 1, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012 .; Guttenberg has removed foreign initials . Rheinische Post. February 18, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  38. ↑ Summa cum laude? . Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. February 16, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  39. ^ Hubertus Gärtner: Parallels to Guttenberg: Andreas Kasper lost his position as head of the regional association after allegations of plagiarism . In: Lippische Landeszeitung . February 17, 2011. Retrieved February 27, 2011.
  40. ↑ When plagiarism meant the end of a career in the CDU . World online. February 25, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  41. ↑ The Baron of Lies . Time online. February 22, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  42. ↑ Guttenberg, the anti-role model . Financial Times Germany. February 21, 2011. Archived from the original on February 24, 2011. Retrieved on January 28, 2012.
  43. ↑ Doctoral supervisor defends Guttenberg: "Accusation absurd" . Focus Online. February 16, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  44. ↑ a b University of Bayreuth: Special Tasks ( Memento from August 31, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
  45. ↑ Roland Preuss and Tanjev Schultz: Plagiarism allegation against Defense Minister: Guttenberg is said to have copied off his doctoral thesis . In: sueddeutsche.de , February 16, 2011. Accessed February 21, 2011. 
  46. ^ University wants Guttenberg's explanation . Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. February 18, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  47. ↑ Guttenberg affair: University does not want to be put under time pressure . Badish newspaper. February 22, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  48. ↑ Doctoral Regulations of the Faculty of Law and Economics ( Memento from January 12, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 124 kB), Section 7.3
  49. ↑ University of Bayreuth recognizes Guttenberg's doctoral degree (PDF; 66 kB) University of Bayreuth. February 23, 2012. Retrieved January 18, 2016.
  50. ↑ University of Bayreuth checks possible intent to deceive . World online. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 24, 2011.
  51. ↑ Guttenberg and the case of Andrew K. . Rheinische Post. February 25, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  52. ↑ Interview with Oliver Lepsius for the Rundschau des Bayerischen Rundfunks on February 25, 2011: Bayreuth constitutional lawyer attacks Guttenberg ( memento of March 2, 2011 in the Internet Archive ).
  53. ^ Declaration by Prof. Dr. Dr. hc mult. Peter Häberle , in: Tagesspiegel of February 28, 2011, accessed on March 1, 2011
  54. ↑ Guttenberg's advertising video for the University of Bayreuth is "revised" . winload.de. February 24, 2011. Retrieved January 28, 2012.
  55. ↑ University of Bayreuth "revised" advertising film with Guttenberg . Financial Times Germany. February 24, 2011. Archived from the original on February 26, 2011. Retrieved on January 28, 2012.
  56. ↑ Merkel strengthens Guttenberg's back . Southwest Press. February 21, 2011. Archived from the original on March 11, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  57. ↑ Bundestag President Lammert criticizes Guttenberg's crisis management . WDR. February 22, 2011. Retrieved February 22, 2017.
  58. ↑ "Guttenberg has systematically deceived" . The daily mirror. February 24, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  59. ↑ Mitteldeutsche Zeitung: Lammert plagiarism affair: “A coffin nail for trust in our democracy” . news current. February 28, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  60. ↑ No support for Lammert . Frankfurter Rundschau. March 4, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  61. ↑ "Guttenberg's explanation is difficult for me to understand" . Mirror online. February 25, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  62. ↑ "Guttenberg did not put the doctoral cap on himself" . Time online. February 27, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  63. ↑ "I am not only secretly ashamed" . Southgerman newspaper. February 28, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  64. ↑ It's getting lonely for Dr. Googleberg . stern.de. February 28, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  65. ↑ Biedenkopf suggests Guttenberg resign . Focus Online. February 28, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  66. ↑ "We are all behind him" . Southgerman newspaper. February 23, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2012.
  67. ↑ Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger: Advance notification of the Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger CSU politician Goppel no longer excludes Guttenberg's resignation . news current. March 1, 2011. Accessed January 31, 2012.
  68. ^ Government press conference on February 28th . The federal government. February 28, 2011.
  69. ↑ Wolfgang Kubicki calls for Merkel to be recalled . stern.de. February 21, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2012.
  70. ^ Coalitionaries shake Guttenberg . Financial Times Germany. February 28, 2011. Archived from the original on March 2, 2011. Retrieved on February 2, 2012.
  71. ↑ "Never mind him get away?" . stern.de. March 1, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2012.
  72. ↑ "Guttenberg should draw the consequences" . World online. February 28, 2011. Retrieved December 8, 2011.
  73. ↑ Lammert does not join . World online. March 1, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2012.
  74. ↑ Karl-Theodor zu Google mountain . taz.de. February 17, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2012.
  75. ↑ Guttenberg is charged with further cheating allegations . Reuters Germany. February 17, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2012.
  76. ↑ Trittin: “Half-baked excuse” . Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. February 18, 2011. Retrieved February 22, 2011.
  77. ↑ SPD speculates about a ghostwriter . Mirror online. February 19, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2012.
  78. ↑ Did the Dr. a. D. deliberately deceived? . tagesschau.de. February 24, 2011. Archived from the original on February 26, 2011. Retrieved on February 3, 2012.
  79. ^ Opposition describes Guttenberg as a liar and a fraud . The West. February 23, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  80. ↑ "No trivial offense like wrong parking" . Mirror online. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  81. ^ Declaration by the Philosophical Faculty Conference (PhFT) on scientific misconduct . Science information service. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  82. ↑ University Association outraged about trivialization . Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. February 25, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  83. ↑ The Wrath of Doctoral Students . Southgerman newspaper. February 25, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  84. ↑ quoted from M.-O. von Riegen ( dpa ): The number one has scratches . In: Nürnberger Nachrichten of February 26, 2011, p. 2.
  85. ^ Guttenberg and causality in the south . Frankfurter Rundschau. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  86. ↑ The thing with strange feathers . Southgerman newspaper. February 25, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  87. ↑ Lawyers see Guttenberg's intent . Rheinische Post. February 26, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
  88. ↑ Declaration by university professors on the standards of academic examinations (PDF; 876 kB) Hausdorff Center for Mathematics, University of Bonn. March 2011. Retrieved February 4, 2012.
  89. ^ Causa Guttenberg: Open letter from doctoral students to the Federal Chancellor . February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 4, 2012.
  90. ↑ Top researchers pillory Guttenberg . Mirror online. February 26, 2011. Retrieved February 4, 2012.
  91. ↑ "Science is based on truthfulness, honesty and trust" . In: German Research Foundation . February 25, 2011. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
  92. ^ Dpa: Leopoldina President criticizes Guttenberg . In: Cellesche Zeitung . February 26, 2011. Archived from the original on January 19, 2012. Retrieved on February 27, 2011.
  93. ↑ Causa Guttenberg: Is pirate copying just a peculiar offense? . German Cultural Council. February 27, 2011. Archived from the original on January 4, 2012. Retrieved on February 4, 2012.
  94. ^ Bundeswehr lawyer doubts Guttenberg's leadership ability , Net Tribune. February 21, 2011. Archived from the original on February 24, 2011. Retrieved on February 22, 2011. 
  95. ^ "Minister is intolerable" . Nuremberg News. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 9, 2012.
  96. ↑ SPD suggests Merkel dismiss Guttenberg . Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 8, 2012.
  97. ↑ Guttenberg dispute harms the troops . stern.de. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 9, 2012.
  98. ↑ Guttenberg's declaration of resignation in full . World online. March 1, 2011. Retrieved February 9, 2012.
  99. ↑ dpa / Die Welt, March 1, 2011 Because of Guttenberg - CSU attacks CDU head-on (Comment 32/60)
  100. ↑ Christian Bernstein (WDR, March 1, 2011): Guttenberg's resignation: Tens of thousands of reactions on the Internet ( Memento from March 3, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  101. ↑ Guttenberg dismissed, successor appointed. Tagesschau , March 3, 2011, archived from the original on June 5, 2011 ; Retrieved March 3, 2011 .
  102. ↑ Guttenberg renounces a Bundestag mandate . Time online. March 3, 2012. Retrieved February 9, 2012.
  103. ^ Debate about the successor to Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg . Augsburg General. March 6, 2011. Retrieved February 9, 2012.
  104. ↑ Guttenberg resigns from the district council . Mirror online. April 15, 2011. Retrieved February 9, 2012.
  105. ↑ Survey for ARD show "Hart aber fair": Guttenberg more popular than before the plagiarism affair - 72 percent of Germans would like him to remain in office . news current. February 23, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  106. ↑ The Germans stand behind Guttenberg . stern.de. February 23, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  107. ↑ "You have beautiful hair" . stern.de. March 5, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  108. ^ Pro and contra Guttenberg . Image. February 24, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  109. ^ Resignation of the Federal Defense Minister divides the Germans . Infratest dimap. March 1, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  110. ↑ a b Little pity for Guttenberg . Infratest dimap. March 2, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  111. ↑ Germans want Guttenberg comeback . World online. March 9, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  112. ↑ Steinmeier overthrows Guttenberg from his throne . Rheinische Post. April 15, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  113. ↑ Plagiarism affair: Scientists outraged by Guttenberg's approach . tagesschau.de. February 26, 2011. Archived from the original on March 2, 2011. Retrieved on February 14, 2012.
  114. ^ Protest with shoes and "Guttbye" . taz. February 27, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  115. ↑ Mockers steal the show from KTG fans . Mirror online. March 5, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  116. ↑ "Without KT, Ade Germany" . Southgerman newspaper. March 6, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  117. ↑ Guttenberg thanks his “Facebook friends” . Central Bavarian Newspaper. March 22, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  118. ^ Heike Sonnberger: Ex-Minister in Yale: Doctoral students angry Guttenberg . In: Der Spiegel . November 8, 2011.
  119. ↑ lab / dapd: Protests at US college: Guttenberg cancels university speech . In: Der Spiegel . January 22, 2013.
  120. ↑ Guttenberg apologizes to scientists . Mirror online. March 12, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  121. ↑ Guttenberg personally apologizes . Focus Online. March 12, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  122. ^ Victim of plagiarism files criminal complaint against Guttenberg . Mirror online. April 12, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  123. ↑ The test continues . Frankenpost. March 2, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  124. ^ Public prosecutor investigates Guttenberg . stern.de. March 3, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  125. ↑ Guttenberg's plagiarism affair: Bayreuth lacks legitimation for examination . Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. March 3, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  126. ↑ The university will not decide until April . Mirror online. March 11, 2011. Retrieved February 14, 2012.
  127. ↑ "There are no consistent oversights" . World online. February 16, 2011. Retrieved February 17, 2012.
  128. ↑ Expert opinion: Guttenberg deliberately copied . Southgerman newspaper. April 8, 2011. Retrieved February 17, 2012.
  129. ^ Uni Bayreuth wants to publish a report on Guttenberg's doctoral thesis . The daily mirror. April 9, 2011. Retrieved February 17, 2012.
  130. ^ Guttenberg lawyer wedges against the University of Bayreuth . Focus Online. April 10, 2011. Retrieved February 17, 2012.
  131. ↑ CSU grumbles about Guttenberg . Mirror online. April 12, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  132. ↑ University of Bayreuth is allowed to publish Guttenberg reports . Mirror online. April 13, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  133. ^ Further steps taken by the University of Bayreuth in the Guttenberg case (PDF; 70 kB) University of Bayreuth. April 12, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  134. ↑ Guttenberg denies plagiarism allegation . Mirror online. April 16, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  135. ↑ Guttenberg speaks of misunderstanding . Mirror online. April 30, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  136. ↑ "Guttenberg has always assumed authorship" . Mirror online. May 6, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  137. ↑ Report to the University Management of the University of Bayreuth (PDF; 6.0 MB) Commission “Self-regulation in Science” of the University of Bayreuth. May 5, 2011. Archived from the original on January 26, 2012. Retrieved on February 23, 2012.
  138. ↑ a b Guttenberg stirs his judges . stern.de. May 11, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  139. ↑ June 24, 2019 9:30 p.m.: Problems with academic ghostwriters. Retrieved September 3, 2019 .
  140. ↑ "What is happening now is a driven hunt" . Image. May 10, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  141. ↑ a b Revenge of the Deprived . November 29, 2011. Retrieved February 23, 2012.
  142. ^ Guttenberg subordinates his university to partiality , Die Welt, November 29, 2011.
  143. ↑ Elmar Schatz: Guttenberg attacks University of Bayreuth ( memento of November 30, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), November 29, 2011.
  144. ↑ Die Welt, November 29, 2011: Guttenberg subordinates his university to partiality
  145. ↑ Tanjev Schulz (Süddeutsche Zeitung, November 25, 2011): Law professor Lepsius on Guttenberg: Lie or loss of reality
  146. ↑ Media release No. 203/2011 from the University of Bayreuth dated November 30, 2011: Statement on the allegations made by Mr. zu Guttenberg against the University of Bayreuth ( Memento from May 13, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 68 kB)
  147. ↑ Example: VGH Baden-Württemberg: Decision of October 13, 2008, 9 S 494/08: Plagiarism in a dissertation
  148. ↑ Wrong doctor, harsh punishment - the Kasper case ( Memento from February 28, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), in: Stern.de from February 25, 2011 .; Die Welt, March 2nd, 2011: abuse of title, breach of trust, copyright infringement. Retrieved March 2, 2011
  149. ^ Der Spiegel, March 7, 2011: Public prosecutor officially initiates investigations against Guttenberg. Retrieved March 7, 2011
  150. ^ ARD, March 10, 2011: Legal consequences of the plagiarism affair: “High hurdles for Guttenberg indictment”.
  151. ^ Butz Peters (Der Spiegel, April 12, 2011): Plagiarism affair: Why there is public interest in the Guttenberg case
  152. ↑ Christoph Titz (Der Spiegel, April 12, 2011): Doctoral affair: Plagiarism victim wants to report Guttenberg
  153. ↑ Berliner Zeitung, April 13, 2011: Bundestag: No criminal complaint against Guttenberg ( Memento from April 21, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  154. ↑ Der Spiegel, April 11, 2011: Plagiarism affair: Merkel demands clarification from Guttenberg
  155. ^ Final report in Bayreuth - Guttenberg gives family complicity to Doktorschmu Spiegel Online, May 11, 2011
  156. ↑ Investigation procedure Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg press release 14/11 of the public prosecutor's office in Hof dated November 23, 2011, accessed on November 23, 2011.
  157. ↑ Der Spiegel, November 23, 2011: Public prosecutor's office closes investigations against Guttenberg. Retrieved November 23, 2011.
  158. ^ Der Spiegel, November 23, 2011: Guttenberg victim: "He deceived without regret"
  159. ↑ Probably neither a penalty order nor indictment against Guttenberg ( memento of October 16, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), Nordbayerischer Kurier , October 14, 2011
  160. ↑ Comeback of the plagiarist - Guttenberg was able to control the date of the termination of the proceedings Der Spiegel, November 26, 2011.
  161. ↑ Giovanni di Lorenzo : “It was not a fraud” . In: The time . November 24, 2011.
  162. ↑ vme / dpa: First interview since the affair: Guttenberg flirted with a quick return . In: Der Spiegel . November 23, 2011.
  163. ^ Christian Stöcker: Guttenberg affair: network defeats ministers . In: Der Spiegel . March 1, 2011.
  164. ↑ PlagiPedi Wiki, list of work proposed for review
  165. ^ Daniel Friedrich Sturm: Guttenberg threatens to withdraw his doctorate . In: The world . February 16, 2011.
  166. ↑ Oliver Trenkamp: Anonymous plagiarism hunters - Do not face! . In: Der Spiegel . July 13, 2011.
  167. ↑ Oliver Trenkamp: New rules Universities should ignore anonymous plagiarism hunters . In: Der Spiegel . 4th July 2013.
  168. ↑ Recommendation 17 Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice
  169. ↑ Silvio Duwe: German Research Foundation wants to prevent anonymous allegations of plagiarism . In: Heise Online . 4th July 2013.
  170. ↑ Hermann Horstkotte: plan Loser activism against academic fraud . In: The time . 18th July 2013.
  171. ↑ "The review of anonymous reports must be weighed up". In: sueddeutsche.de. July 5, 2013, accessed June 26, 2018 .
  172. ↑ Archived copy ( Memento from June 16, 2018 in the Internet Archive )
  173. ↑ DFG on the confidentiality of ombudsman procedures and whistleblowers . In: German Research Foundation (DFG) . July 10, 2013.
  174. ↑ Guttenberg's tactics are extremely dangerous. In: Zeit Online from February 24, 2011.
  175. ↑ Ulrich Schnabel (Die Zeit No. 10, March 3, 2011): The defending champions
  176. ↑ Inge Kutter: What is the Dr. value? Never before has so many doctorates been awarded in Germany as today - the quality falls by the wayside . In: The time . March 4, 2011, accessed March 4, 2011.
  177. ^ Rudolf Neumaier: "The university makes itself an accomplice of the fraudster" . In: Süddeutsche Zeitung . March 11, 2011.
  178. ↑ German Bundestag printed matter 17/5195, 17th electoral term, March 23, 2011: Motion ... of the Alliance 90 / THE GREENS parliamentary group: Scientific honesty and quality assurance for doctorates (PDF; 98 kB)
  179. ↑ »Stress test« selected as word of the year 2011. In: gfds.de. December 16, 2011, accessed January 12, 2015 .
  180. ↑ Peter Lindner: Guttenberg: Resignation and political future: "Grotesque loss of reality" . In: Süddeutsche Zeitung . March 2, 2011. Interview with historian Michael Philipp.