The current Czech right-wing government is a prime example of unprofessional and ideologically arrogant work in many areas. One of them is research, which is represented by the Minister for research and innovation. Her greatest professional experience, which is several years of running a little hotel, should probably qualify her to lead Czech researchers and make world-class decisions about Czech research. Censorship manners are part of her activities.
Such a profile is inherent in several members of the current government. It probably stems from the fact that right-wing political parties have been pushing hard for government seats that they lacked when they were in opposition for eight years. That is why they started very early on with personnel purges at several state institutions.
This has had its mediated effects in the academic circles. After a series of unsubstantiated accusations, they removed M. Hrubec as director of the Center of Global Studies. Many researchers and citizens in many countries around the world were outraged and signed a petition against this in order to preserve freedom of research guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms under the constitutional order of the Czech Republic. Unfortunately, this has not helped. Similarly, Hrubec’s cooperator and successor M. Brabec was then removed as director. It was fatal for him that he probably stood too much for freedom of research, and after only six months in office he was also dismissed. Some other researchers now have to survive in conditions that allow them to make only a fraction of the original research. And other researchers have lost their jobs in the process; especially those talk about their very bad experience of the change in situation.
It was expected that this scandal would be at least partially calmed down by a new call for research leader, in which an excellent internationally respected researcher, who has a background and excellent long-term research and teaching experience in Italy, Germany, Austria, Brazil, among other countries, applied. This is matched by his linguistic experience in Italian, English, German, Portuguese and Spanish. But he was not selected. What was the surprise of the members of the Center of Global Studies and many other scholars when Ondřej Lánský was imposed as head, under whose leadership the Center with its extensive research was quickly closed down. More than six months before that, the director of the Institute of Philosophy had been telling the members of the Centre how the Centre’s research programme would be eliminated. Lansky then did the dirty work by carrying it out. He brought the Center to ruin after 17 years of its successful existence, and in return he was given the job of department head with a small team. How is it possible that a gravedigger of research got the directorship? Simple opportunism and careerism?
Since the Institute of Philosophy is one of the main research institutions in the Czech Republic, they want their scientists to publish mainly in world languages in high-quality journals and publishing houses. However, according to his own list on the website, Lánský, who wants to be a leader, had only one single research article in a foreign language in his entire life until he took office. And this is just one example. There is an abysmal research difference between the expected leader on the one hand and Lánský on the other.
Of course, the new boss suits ideologically, because he was instrumental in the closure of the Centre and the continuation of the personnel purges. Last year in the Centre, they did not allow continuing work of experts who focused on philosophical and historical aspects of Russia, China, and Arab countries, such as V. Salminen. Since the beginning of this year, also D. Dinusova, who is an expert on Latin American philosophy, could not continue in her work, etc. A gradual, salami-like personnel destruction of the team.
The purges concern mainly women. There is only one of the team left. Yet, especially in philosophy and similar fields, where there are fewer women, the training of women researchers is a long-term issue. The previous leadership of the team worked successfully to integrate female colleagues and succeeded in strengthening the team in this way.
Today, however, a weak research leader leads only a residual team and is not up to the job also because of too much accumulation of workload. In two departments (at an academy and a school), he even cumulates two leadership positions. However, the Code of Ethics states that a researcher is allowed to have a maximum of 1.5 full-time positions (including grants). Thus, Lánský either violates the Code of Ethics by having more full-time positions than allowed, or he has two positions up to the size of 1.5, but then he has a maximum of only 0.75 full-time positions for each of the two leadership positions on average. However, there wouldn’t even be 0.75 for each leadership position, since he also teaches and does research. How can one pursue leadership positions professionally and thoroughly if he does them only on a small time basis? Will the Institute of Philosophy take action and remove this sub-standard researcher from his leadership position or let him damage the reputation of the Institute?
The Minister for research has already come directly to the Institute of Philosophy, presumably to check personally that everything is going as she hopes. Apparently she was satisfied when she then had her picture taken with her supporters in the courtyard of the institute. I guess she’s got the repression under control. Hopefully, when the political situation changes, there will be a review of the case and redress.
Translated with Internet translator
Zbyšek Kupský