Notice on issuing the Rules for Investigation and Handling of Scientific Research Integrity Cases (Trial)
National Science and Technology Development Administration (2019) No. 323
Member units of the Joint Conference on the Construction of Scientific Research Integrity, science and Technology departments (committees and bureaus) of provinces, autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the Central Government and cities separately under the Plan, Science and Technology Bureau of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps:
The Rules for Investigation and Handling of Scientific Research Integrity Cases (Trial) have been deliberated and adopted at the 7th meeting of the Joint Conference on Scientific Research Integrity Construction, and are hereby issued to you for implementation.
Ministry of Science and Technology Central Publicity Department Supreme People's Court Supreme People's Procuratorate National Development and Reform Commission Ministry of Education Ministry of Industry and Information Technology Ministry of Public Security Ministry of Finance Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs State Health Commission State Administration for Market Regulation Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Engineering Natural Science Foundation China Association for Science and Technology Central Military Commission Equipment Development Central Military Commission Science and Technology Commission2019年9月25日
Rules for Investigation and Handling of scientific Research Integrity Cases (Trial)
Chapter I General provisions
Article 1 These Rules are formulated in accordance with the Law of the People's Republic of China on Science and Technology Progress, the Higher Education Law of the People's Republic of China, and Several Opinions on Further Strengthening the Construction of scientific research integrity in order to standardize the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases. 〖JP〗
Article 2 The term "scientific research integrity cases" as mentioned in these Rules refers to the cases in which suspected violations of the requirements for scientific research integrity are investigated and dealt with on the basis of reports or other relevant clues.
The acts of violating the requirements of scientific research integrity as mentioned in the preceding paragraph (hereinafter referred to as acts of scientific research dishonesty) refer to the acts of violating the codes of conduct and norms of scientific research occurring in scientific research and related activities, including:
(1) Application for plagiarism, plagiarism or appropriation of others' research results or projects;
(2) fabricating the research process, forging or tampering with research data, charts, conclusions, test reports or user reports;
(3) buying and selling, writing papers or project applications on behalf of others, fabricating peer review experts and review opinions;
(4) obtaining approval for scientific research activities, scientific research projects (projects, funds, etc.), scientific research funds, awards, honors, posts and titles, etc., by intentionally providing false information and resorting to fraud or by resorting to bribery, exchange of interests or other improper means;
(5) violating the norms of scientific research ethics;
(6) violation of awards, patents and other standards for the attribution of research results and publication of papers;
(7) other acts of dishonesty in scientific research.
Article 3 No unit or individual may obstruct or interfere with the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases, and may not make excuses to cover up.
Article 4 Investigated persons and witnesses in scientific research integrity cases shall actively cooperate with the investigation, truthfully explain the issues, provide relevant evidence, and shall not conceal or destroy evidentiary materials.
Chapter II Division of responsibilities
Article 5 The Ministry of Science and Technology and the Academy of Social Sciences are respectively responsible for coordinating the investigation of scientific research integrity cases in the field of natural science and philosophy and social science on the issuance of the "Rules for the investigation and Handling of scientific research Integrity Cases (Trial)" notice. Guidance and supervision should be strengthened on the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases, and joint investigations can be organized or different departments (units) can be coordinated for major scientific research integrity cases that have aroused widespread concern in society or involve multiple departments (units).
The competent department shall be responsible for guiding and supervising the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases in the system, establish and improve the information reporting mechanism for major scientific research integrity cases, and may independently organize investigations into major scientific research integrity cases in the system.
Article 6 If the person under investigation in a scientific research integrity case is a natural person, the unit to which he belongs at the time of investigation shall be responsible for the investigation. If the investigation involves dishonesty in scientific research carried out by the person under investigation in other units where he or she has worked or studied, the unit concerned shall actively cooperate in carrying out the investigation and promptly send the investigation and treatment to the unit where the person under investigation is located.
If the person under investigation is the main person in charge of the unit or the person under investigation is a legal entity, the competent department at a higher level shall be responsible for the investigation. If there is no superior competent department, the provincial science and technology administrative department or the responsible unit for the integrity construction of scientific research in philosophy and social sciences shall be responsible for organizing the investigation.
Article 7 The administrative department (unit) of the project or fund shall be responsible for the investigation and handling of any dishonesty in scientific research during the application, review, implementation and conclusion of scientific research projects and funds supported by financial funds. Project declaration and recommendation units, project undertaking units, project participating units, etc. shall, in accordance with the requirements of the project and fund management department (unit), take the initiative to carry out and actively cooperate with the investigation, and deal with the violators according to their responsibilities and powers.
Article 8 The scientific research dishonesty in the application for science and technology awards and scientific and technological talents shall be investigated by the management departments (units) for science and technology awards and scientific and technological talents, and shall be dealt with accordingly according to their management duties and powers. Science and technology awards, science and technology talent recommendation (nomination) units and reporting units should actively cooperate and take the initiative to carry out investigations and processing.
Article 9 The first corresponding author or the first signed unit of the first author shall take the lead in investigating and dealing with dishonesty in scientific research published in a paper. The units of other authors of a paper shall actively cooperate with the investigation and handling of their own authors and promptly report the investigation and handling to the lead unit. Where a dissertation is suspected of dishonesty in scientific research, the degree-granting unit shall be responsible for investigation and handling.
The degree-awarding unit shall be responsible for the investigation and handling. The editorial department or publishing house of the published journal has the obligation to cooperate with the investigation, should take the initiative to investigate whether the content of the paper violates the requirements of scientific research integrity, and should promptly inform the relevant clues, investigation conclusions, processing decisions, etc., to the author's unit.
Article 10 The relevant units that are responsible for the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases shall specify the institutions that are responsible for the investigation and handling of their own units, and shall be responsible for the registration, acceptance, investigation, handling and review of scientific research integrity cases.
Chapter III Investigation
Section 1 Reporting and acceptance
Article 11 Reports on scientific research integrity cases may be made through the following channels:
(1) to report to the unit to which the informant belongs;
(2) report to the superior competent department or relevant administrative department of the unit against which the report is reported;
(3) to report to the administrative departments (units) of scientific research projects, science and technology awards, science and technology personnel programs, and the supervisory and competent departments;
(4) Reporting to the editorial department or publishing institution of the journal in which the paper was published;
(5) Other means.
Article 12 The reporting of scientific research integrity cases shall meet the following conditions at the same time:
(1) there is a clear target for reporting;
(2) there are clear facts of violation;
(3) Having objective and clear evidentiary materials or clues for verification. Real-name reporting is encouraged, and malicious reporting and false reporting are not allowed.
Article 13 The following reports shall not be accepted:
(1) the contents of the report do not belong to acts of dishonesty in scientific research;
(2) there is no clear evidence or traceable clues;
(3) making repeated reports against the same object without new evidence or clues;
(4) the effective handling decision has been made and there is no new evidence or clue.
Article 14 The unit that receives the report shall conduct an initial audit within 15 working days. Initial verification should be conducted by 2 staff members.
If the initial verification meets the acceptance conditions, it shall be accepted. Among them, those that fall within the scope of responsibilities of the unit shall be investigated by the unit; If it does not belong to the responsibility scope of the unit, it can be transferred to the relevant responsible unit or inform the informant to report to the relevant responsible unit.
The real-name informant shall be notified within 5 working days after completing the initial verification of the acceptance of the report. If the report is not accepted, the real-name informant shall explain the situation. The informant may object to the inadmissibility and give reasons, and shall accept the case if the conditions for acceptance are met; If the objection is not established, it shall not be accepted.
Article 15 If the following leads in scientific research integrity cases meet the conditions for acceptance, the relevant units shall take the initiative to accept them, and the competent departments shall strengthen supervision and inspection.
(1) clues transferred by higher authorities or relevant departments;
(2) problems and clues found in daily scientific research management activities or in science and technology plans, science and technology awards, science and technology personnel management, etc.;
(3) clues of dishonesty in scientific research disclosed by the media.
Section 2 Investigation
Article 16 An investigation plan shall be formulated to clarify the investigation contents, personnel, methods, schedule, safeguard measures, etc., and shall be implemented after approval by the relevant responsible person of the unit.
Article 17 The investigation shall include administrative investigation and academic review. The administrative investigation shall be organized by the unit to investigate the facts of the case, including the verification of relevant original data, agreements, invoices and other certification materials, research process, profit, etc. Academic review The academic (degree, title) committee of the unit is entrusted by the unit or an expert group is formed as required to evaluate the academic issues involved in the case. The expert group shall consist of no less than 5 members, and shall be composed of scientific and technological experts, management experts, and research ethics experts in the field involved in the case as needed.
Article 18 Where an investigation requires interviews with persons under investigation, witnesses, etc., no less than two investigators shall participate in the interviews. The contents of the interviews shall be recorded in writing and confirmed by the signatures of the interviewees and the interviewees.
Article 19 Investigators may review, extract, copy and seal up relevant materials and equipment in accordance with regulations and procedures. The relevant data and equipment transferred and sealed shall be recorded in writing and signed by the investigators and the data and equipment manager for confirmation.
Article 20 During an investigation, the statements and arguments of the person under investigation shall be heard, and the relevant facts, reasons and evidence shall be verified. The informant may be required to provide additional materials as needed, and if necessary, with the consent of the informant, the informant and the person under investigation may be organized for face-to-face cross-examination. Collecting evidence by threat, inducement, deception or other illegal means is strictly prohibited. 〖JP〗
Article 21 If it is found during the investigation that the conduct of the person under investigation may affect public health and safety or lead to other serious consequences, the investigators shall report it immediately or transfer it to the relevant departments for handling according to procedure.
Article 22 Where the key information is found to be insufficient, or the conditions for investigation are not available for the time being, or the person under investigation dies during the investigation, the investigation may be suspended or terminated with the approval of the person in charge of the unit. When conditions are met, the suspended investigation shall be started in a timely manner, and the suspended time shall not be included in the investigation time limit. The suspension or termination of an investigation into the death of a person under investigation does not affect the investigation into other persons under investigation involved in the case.
Article 23 An investigation report shall be formed upon the conclusion of the investigation. The investigation report shall include the description of the contents of the report, the investigation process, the basic information of the investigation, the identification and basis of the violation facts, the investigation conclusion, the responsibility of the relevant personnel, the confirmation of the person under investigation, and the handling opinions or suggestions. The investigation report must be signed by all the investigators.
If a supplementary investigation is needed, the direction and main issues of the investigation shall be determined, conducted by the original investigators, and a new investigation report shall be formed based on the supplementary investigation. Article 24 The investigation of scientific research integrity cases shall be completed within 6 months from the date of acceptance of the decision. In particularly major and complex cases, where the investigation cannot be completed within the time limit prescribed in the preceding paragraph, the investigation period may be extended after approval by the principal person in charge of the unit, and the extension period shall not exceed one year at most. For cases transferred by higher authorities and relevant departments, the delay of investigation shall be reported to the transferring authorities or departments.
Chapter IV Treatment
Article 25: After the fact, nature, and circumstances of the dishonest behavior of the investigated person in scientific research are finally determined, the investigating unit shall make a decision on the handling of the investigated person according to its responsibilities, or propose handling suggestions to relevant units or departments, and prepare a handling decision letter or handling proposal. Article 26: The handling decision or proposal shall include the following contents:
(1) Basic information of the responsible person (including ID number, social credit code, etc.);
(2) Facts of violation;
(3) Processing decisions and basis;
(4) Remedial channels and deadlines;
(5) Other contents that should be specified.
The unit making the handling decision is responsible for delivering a written handling decision to the investigated person and informing the real name whistleblower.
Article 27: Before making a decision to handle a case, the person to be dealt with shall be notified in writing of the facts, reasons, and basis for the proposed decision, and shall be informed of their right to state and defend in accordance with the law. If the respondent fails to make a statement or defense, it shall be deemed as a waiver of the right to make a statement or defense. If the respondent makes a statement or defense, their opinions should be fully heard.
Article 28 The handling includes the following measures:
(1) Scientific research integrity admonition conversation;
(2) Criticize within a certain scope or publicly;
(3) Suspend financial support for scientific research projects and activities, and set a deadline for rectification;
(4) Terminate or revoke relevant research projects funded by the government, recover the allocated funding and remaining funds according to the original channels, revoke relevant academic awards, honorary titles, job titles, etc. obtained through dishonest behavior in scientific research, and recover bonuses;
(5) A certain period of time until permanent cancellation of qualifications for applying for or applying for science and technology plan projects (special projects, funds, etc.), science and technology awards, titles of science and technology talents, and promotion of professional and technical positions;
(6) Cancel the titles of high-level experts such as academicians that have been obtained, as well as the membership or membership of academic organizations such as societies, associations, research associations, and academic work institutions such as academic and degree committees;
(7) A certain period of time until permanent cancellation of qualifications as a nominee or recommender, nominated or recommender, evaluation expert, etc;
(8) Reduce or suspend the recruitment of graduate students for a certain period of time until the qualification of graduate supervisor is cancelled;
(9) Suspending the granting of degrees, not granting degrees, or revoking degrees;
(10) Other treatments.
The above measures can be combined for use. If the person responsible for scientific research dishonesty is a party member or public official, the party discipline and government affairs punishment shall also be given to the person responsible in accordance with the Regulations of the CPC on Disciplinary Punishment and other provisions. If the responsible person is a staff member of a public institution, they shall be punished in accordance with the personnel management authority of cadres and in accordance with the Provisional Regulations on the Punishment of Staff Members of Public Institutions. Those suspected of illegal or criminal activities should be transferred to relevant state organs for legal treatment.
Article 29: If a relevant institution or unit engages in organized research dishonesty, or evades responsibility, conceals cover up, or retaliates against the informant during investigation and handling, the competent department shall revoke the relevant benefits and honors obtained by the institution or unit as a result, issue a warning, key supervision, circulate a notice of criticism, suspend the allocation or recovery of funding, reduce indirect costs, and cancel the qualification to apply for and undertake projects within a certain period of time, And the main responsible person and direct responsible person shall be held accountable in accordance with relevant regulations.
Article 30: If the subject of investigation falls under any of the following circumstances, it shall be deemed that the circumstances are relatively minor and may be dealt with in a lighter or mitigated manner:
(1) There is evidence indicating that it is a negligent act and has not caused significant impact;
(2) Those who have a relatively minor degree of fault and can actively cooperate with the investigation;
(3) Proactively correcting errors, recovering losses, or effectively preventing the occurrence of harmful consequences before investigation and handling;
(4) Proactively admitting mistakes during the investigation and publicly promising to strictly comply with research integrity requirements and not to engage in research dishonesty.
Article 31: If the respondent falls under any of the following circumstances, it shall be deemed as a serious or serious case and shall be dealt with in a serious or aggravated manner:
Falsifying, destroying, or concealing evidence;
(2) Preventing others from providing evidence, or interfering or obstructing investigation and verification;
(3) Strike or retaliate against the informant;
(4) There is a transfer or exchange of interests;
(5) Conducting research dishonesty in an organized manner;
(6) Multiple instances of dishonesty in scientific research or multiple instances of dishonesty in scientific research simultaneously;
(7) Those who have a bad attitude, conclusive evidence, clear facts, and refuse to admit their mistakes;
（8） Other situations.
If the circumstances mentioned in the preceding paragraph have caused serious consequences or adverse effects, the circumstances are particularly serious and should be intensified.
Article 32: The determination of the severity of dishonesty in scientific research shall take into account the following factors:
(1) The degree to which the behavior deviates from the recognized norms of behavior in the scientific community;
(2) Whether there is intentional falsification, deception, destruction, or concealment of evidence, or the act of preventing others from providing evidence, interfering with or obstructing investigations, or striking or retaliating against the informant;
(3) The degree to which the behavior causes adverse social effects;
(4) Whether the behavior occurs for the first time or repeatedly;
(5) The attitude of the perpetrator towards the investigation and handling;
(6) Other factors that need to be considered.
Article 33: If it is found through investigation that there is a dishonest act in scientific research, the following measures shall be taken depending on the severity of the situation:
(1) If the circumstances are relatively minor, warning, research integrity admonition conversation, or suspension of financially funded research projects and activities, rectification within a time limit, and suspension of degree awarding;
(2) If the circumstances are serious, the qualification to undertake projects supported by financial funds within 3 years and other qualifications stipulated in these rules shall be cancelled, the enrollment of graduate students shall be reduced or suspended, and the degree shall not be granted or revoked;
(3) If the circumstances are serious, the employer shall, in accordance with the law and regulations, demote or dismiss the position, and cancel the qualification to undertake financial fund support projects for 3-5 years and other qualifications stipulated in these rules; （4） If the circumstances are particularly serious, the employer shall, in accordance with the law and regulations, revoke their qualifications for promotion to a professional title, application for financial support projects, and other qualifications stipulated in these rules for at least 5 years or even permanently, and make them known to the public.
If one of the circumstances in Article 2 (1) (2) (3) (4) of these Rules exists, the handling shall not be lower than the scale specified in the preceding paragraph (2).
Article 34: If a responsible person who has been dealt with in accordance with Article 33 (2) (3) (4) of these Rules is applying for financial funding projects or is recommended as a relevant candidate, nominee, or recommender, their eligibility for application, nomination, or recommendation shall be terminated.
For those who use dishonest behavior in scientific research to obtain funding projects, research funds, scientific and technological talent titles, scientific and technological awards, honors, job titles, educational degrees, etc., the obtained funding projects, talents, rewards, honors, job titles, educational degrees, etc. shall be revoked, and the project funds and bonuses shall be recovered.
Article 35: In accordance with the provisions of these rules, if the investigated person is given a certain period of time to cancel the relevant qualifications or cancel the relevant titles and qualifications obtained, the responsible person shall be criticized within the unit or system, and recorded in the database of serious dishonesty in scientific research, and included in the credit information system in accordance with relevant national regulations. Relevant departments and local authorities shall be provided with joint punishment for dishonesty against the responsible subject in accordance with the law and regulations. According to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, if it is recorded in the database of serious dishonesty in scientific research, it should be stated in the handling decision.
Article 36: If, in accordance with these rules, the respondent is given a certain period of time to cancel the relevant qualifications and cancel the relevant titles and qualifications obtained, the decision on the disposal shall be made by the relevant units at or below the provincial level, The decision making unit shall submit the handling decision and investigation report to the provincial science and technology administrative department or the responsible unit for the integrity construction of philosophy and social science research and the superior competent department within one month after the decision takes effect. The provincial science and technology administrative department shall submit it to the Ministry of Science and Technology through the Research Integrity Information System within 10 working days after receiving it.
If the processing decision is made by a department of the State Council and its affiliated units, the department shall submit the processing decision and investigation report to the Ministry of Science and Technology within one month after the processing decision takes effect.
Article 37: If the dishonest behavior of the investigated person in scientific research involves scientific and technological plans (special projects, funds, etc.), scientific and technological awards, scientific and technological talents, etc., the investigation and handling unit shall simultaneously submit the investigation and handling decision or handling proposal to the scientific and technological plan (special projects, funds, etc.), scientific and technological awards, and scientific and technological talent management department (unit). After receiving the investigation report and handling decision letter or handling proposal, the science and technology plan (special projects, funds, etc.), science and technology reward, and technology talent management department (unit) shall handle the investigated person within their scope of responsibility based on the verified scientific research dishonesty behavior, and prepare a handling decision letter, which shall be delivered to the investigated person and their unit.
Article 38: If no dishonest behavior in scientific research is found through investigation, the investigating unit shall promptly clarify it through appropriate means such as public disclosure.
If the whistleblower fabricates facts and maliciously reports, the unit where the whistleblower belongs should handle the whistleblower seriously in accordance with relevant regulations.
Article 39: After the processing decision takes effect, if the person being processed publicly makes a commitment through national media to strictly abide by the requirements of scientific research integrity, no longer engage in dishonest behavior in scientific research, or makes significant contributions to the country and society, the unit that made the processing decision may reduce the processing of the person based on their application.
Chapter V Review of complaints
Article 40 If a party is not satisfied with the decision on handling, it may, within 15 days from the date of receipt of the decision on handling, submit a written application for review to the unit or department that made the decision on investigation and handling in accordance with the relief channels specified in the decision on handling, stating the reasons and providing relevant evidence or clues.
The investigation and processing unit (department) shall, within 15 working days from the date of receiving the application for review, make a decision on whether or not to accept it. If it decides to accept the case, it shall organize a separate investigation team or entrust a third-party agency to carry out an investigation in accordance with the investigation procedures of these Rules, make a review report, and feedback the review decision to the informants.
Article 41 If the party concerned is not satisfied with the result of the review, it may lodge a written appeal to the competent department at a higher level of the investigation and handling unit or to the scientific research integrity management department. The appeal must be clearly justified and provide sufficient evidence. The relevant unit or department shall make a decision on whether to accept the complaint within 15 working days from the date of receiving it. If a complaint is made only on the grounds that it is not satisfied with the results of the investigation and the results of the review, but cannot explain other reasons and provide sufficient evidence, or on the basis of the same facts and reasons, it shall not be accepted. If the decision is accepted, the review shall be organized again, and the result of the review shall be the final result.
Article 42 The review shall produce a review decision, and the review decision shall give a clear reply to the reasons put forward by the parties. In principle, the review should be completed within 90 working days from the date of acceptance.
Chapter VI Safeguard and supervision
Article 43 Personnel involved in the investigation and handling work shall abide by the work discipline, sign a confidentiality agreement, shall not privately retain, conceal, extract, copy or disclose the problem clues and information involved, and shall not disclose or publicly investigate and handle the work without permission. When a third party is commissioned to conduct an investigation, test, evaluation or evaluation, confidentiality procedures shall be followed. 〖JP〗
Article 44 The Investigation Office shall strictly enforce the withdrawal system. Experts and investigators involved in the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases should sign a recusal statement. The person under investigation or the informant's close relatives, witnesses, interested persons, research cooperation or teacher-student relationship, or other circumstances that may affect the impartial investigation and processing, shall not participate in the investigation and processing work, and shall voluntarily apply for withdrawal. The person under investigation, the informant and other relevant personnel have the right to request his recusal.
Article 45 The Investigation Office shall protect the legitimate rights and interests of the informant, the informant, the witness, etc. It shall not divulge the relevant information, and shall not transfer the report materials to the informant or the reported unit or other interested parties. Those who ask for bribes, violate the principles of confidentiality and avoidance, or divulge information in the course of investigation and handling shall be dealt with seriously according to law and regulations.
Article 46 Institutions of higher learning, scientific research institutions, medical and health institutions, enterprises, social organizations and other units should establish and improve the supporting system related to investigation and handling work, specify the acceptance of reports, the identification standards of scientific research dishonesty, investigation and handling procedures and operating procedures, clarify the division of responsibilities of the unit's scientific research integrity leaders and internal institutions, strengthen the guarantee of work funds and training and guidance for relevant personnel, and grasp early The role of employment contracts (labor contracts), research integrity commitments and research data management policies in safeguarding the legitimacy of investigation procedures should be taken into account. Article 47 The competent department shall strengthen the guidance and supervision of the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases in the system. Article 48 The Ministry of Science and Technology and the Academy of Social Sciences shall strengthen information notification and disclosure of major scientific research integrity cases in the fields of natural sciences and philosophy and social sciences. The member units and localities of the Joint conference on the construction of scientific research integrity should strengthen the coordination and cooperation in the investigation and handling of scientific research integrity cases, mutual recognition of results and information sharing.
Chapter VII Supplementary Provisions
Article 49 Lenient treatment means less lenient treatment within the range of treatment that should be given to dishonesty in scientific research as provided for in these Rules.
heavier treatment means heavier treatment within the range of treatment for dishonesty in scientific research as provided for in these Rules.
mitigating treatment means to give treatment in one step beyond the range of treatment for dishonesty in scientific research as provided for in these Rules.
heavier treatment means heavier treatment in addition to the range of treatment for dishonesty in scientific research as provided for in these Rules.
Article 50 All relevant departments and units shall formulate specific rules in accordance with these Rules and in light of the actual situation.
Article 51 If the personnel or units involved in a scientific research integrity case are under the administration of the armed forces, the armed forces shall investigate and handle the case in accordance with its relevant regulations. The relevant competent authorities have formulated the rules for the investigation and treatment of scientific research integrity cases in the industry, the field and the system, and the processing scale is not lower than the rules, the investigation and treatment can be carried out in accordance with the existing rules.
Article 52 These Rules shall come into force as of the date of promulgation and shall be interpreted by the Ministry of Science and Technology and the Academy of Social Sciences.
