4 hours agoOmbudsman: The doctor's competition. UP's constitutes discrimination
Periskopi(5 years ago)
(5 years ago)The ombudsman in the application of his constitutional and legal functions published the report with recommendations in complaints filed by complainers about discrimination for the candidates' admission in the 2020/2021 academic year studies at Pristina University “Pristina”. As revealed in the communiqué issued by the [...] institution
As indicated in the communiqué issued by the Ombudsperson's Institution, the report with recommendations aims to draw the attention of Pristina University “Hasan Pristina” due to the criteria envisioned by the UPP in the competition for candidates' admission to the 2020/2021 academic studies, dated September 9, 2020, with no.prot.2/262, specifically at point 13.
“Candidates submit to the principle of stopping conflict of interest under legislation in effect, Ethics Code and Guide for Prevention of Conflict of Interest of the Ethics Council in the UP. In particular, it will be found that there is a conflict of interest if the candidate/Candidate has one or more members of the academic unit's academic staff. ”
Subtitles: L-019 for the ombudsman, November 6, 2020, via email, has accepted the complaint of the complainers: Mr. Vision Voula, Mrs. Zana Dragidela, A.645/2020, who have claimed to be candidates for doctoral studies at the Faculty of Medicine, Stomatology Programme; as well as complainers Mr. Ardi Ahmeti, A.n.650/2020, who has claimed to be a doctoral study candidate at the Economic Faculty (more: complainers), brought against UP's about discrimination in the public competition, announced on October 23, 2020, with no.prot.2/262”, says the Ombudsman's report.
The ombudsman claims that the competition's 13th point for doctoral studies, October 23, 2020, is discrimination.
The ombudsman finds that complainers in the concrete case are candidates for doctors, are children and relatives of professors at the Faculty of Economics and at the UP Medical Faculty, however, they should be treated equally in relation to other candidates. Inequitable treatment is a practice contrary to the concept of legal equality, defined by Article 24 of the Constitution.
The ombudsman claims that the UPP has rightly, but is late, addressed the Anti-Corruption Agency as the body responsible for assessing the dilemma for conflict of interest.
The ombudsman, referring to the above-mentioned arguments, with the goal of improving the work of the UPI and preventing further discrimination against the complaint indictees, recommends Pristina University “hasan Pristina” to create appropriate policies to prevent urgently any practice that presents uneven treatment with the case of public contests.
To cancel the discriminatory criteria set out at the 13th page for UPP doctoral studies, on October 23, 2020, with no.prot.2/262, which: “Candids submit to the principle of halting conflict of interest under legislation, Ethic Code and Paths Guide for Prevention of the Ethics Council's Conflict of Interest in UP. In particular, it will be found that there is a conflict of interest if the candidate/Candidate has one or more members of the academic staff of the relevant academic unit”.
UP in the future such dilemmas for assessing the conflict of interest to address without procrastination in the institution responsible for the assessment of the conflict of interest, the Anti-Corruption Agency, as the body responsible.
