Philological Library of the Free University of Berlin: Please read - and quote correctly
Photo: Z1022 Patrick Pleul / dpa
Franziska Giffey has resigned from her position as Federal Family Minister.
She continues to stand by her statement that she has written her work to the best of her knowledge and belief, she said.
"I regret if I made mistakes." An admission of guilt?
Somehow yes, but somehow not either.
In any case, Giffey's request to Chancellor Merkel today to remove her from office is remarkable in several ways.
First of all, regardless of the particular circumstances of her personal case: a politician is accused of scientific misconduct in connection with her doctoral thesis, and she resigns after the investigative commission comes to the conclusion that the allegations are justified. This is consistent and inevitable out of respect for science and the electorate.
If you take into account the specific course of the Giffey cause, today's decision becomes even more remarkable.
The other day she
said
in the
Tagesspiegel
podcast "A Round of Berlin" that the topic of doctorate was through for her.
"For me, you can say that the drop has been sucked." However, she also said that she wanted to remain the SPD top candidate in the House of Representatives election in September because she was elected, "where it was clear that it would be rolled out again gives".
Now she sees her responsibility to "keep this promise".
Family Minister: no.
Governing Mayoress: yes?
So Giffey differentiates: A family minister who came into office when there was no talk of plagiarism allegations must resign if these are confirmed.
A politician who wants to become the governing mayor of Berlin can pursue her ambitions because the affair is older than the candidacy.
You can do it that way.
It is of course a bit constructed, at least if one is of the opinion that integrity is an absolute value and does not depend on the point in time at which it is questioned.
The fact that Giffey is now acting so quickly, even before the decision of the investigative commission was officially announced, is also noticeable.
Of course, it should not be understood as a sense of responsibility-driven flight forward, but as a sober calculation: the sooner the hype about her resignation comes, the faster it will be over - and will no longer accompany her until shortly before the election.
Nevertheless, the doubts will be loud for the next few days and weeks.
The pressure to withdraw from the top candidacy will be enormous - and the other parties will increase it to the maximum.
Not because they are concerned about the consequences for science, but because this is such a good opportunity to get rid of a popular and strong competitor on the home stretch.
Scientifically and legally questionable
And it is precisely at this point that the Free University, which led the proceedings, has to put up with allegations.
And serious ones.
Not only because at the first attempt at the end of 2019 she had given the investigation into Giffey's misconduct so thoroughly against the wall that a year later she could not help but announce another review of the doctoral thesis by a new commission.
But also because the first run took eight months - only to end with a scientifically and legally questionable result (only one complaint).
In addition, the second procedure, announced in mid-November 2020, again stretched over months, contrary to initial announcements - in fact, the new examination board only met for the first time at the end of January.
Now one can say: it serves Franziska Giffey rightly.
If you cheat, you have to face the consequences.
And if that means that you will be confronted with your misconduct over and over again for two and a half years.
That you keep thinking that the thing is over and then it comes back with power.
Possibly until the election itself.
Titles as status symbols
It's just about more. It is about the appearance of a university and its presidium, which for a long time did not seem to be able to cope with a scientific-political crisis. It is about the integrity of science, the quality standards of which are called into doubt by every plagiarism case - but all the more so when its institutions themselves act so hesitantly and unprofessionally. And the political culture has been damaged again - by the way, it doesn't matter whether Giffey remains Berlin's top candidate or not.
All of this will be the case as long as academic titles are regarded as status symbols in our society, on ID cards and on doorbell signs.
And as long as politicians think that having a "Dr." in front of their name on their election poster will bring them more career options or votes.
Doctoral degrees should only be about certifying scientific achievements (and in case of doubt, if the quality is insufficient, about refusing them) and not about opening any doors outside of science.
So far, however, this requirement is nothing more than a beautiful illusion.