"Mikiko Tamai sues Kyoto University for the administrative action of revoking her doctorate, the third court hearing!" Judge Kawada announced on the bench. Immediately, there was a "click" and the crisp sound of the gavel exploded. "Next, by

Kyoto University continues to present evidence to prove the legality of the degree revocation related to corruption." Judge Kawada's voice sounded.

Takezawa and Asakura Yan looked at each other, and then the experienced female lawyer stood up and said: "Next, the defendant will present the eighth set of evidence. The first piece of evidence is Kyoto University's internal communication email and its attachment "

The second piece of evidence is the communication email between Kyoto University and Mikiko. The third piece of evidence is the "Meeting List Sign-in Form". The fourth piece of evidence is the "Expert Group Interview and Investigation Transcript". The fifth piece of evidence is,

The emails exchanged between Mikiko’s mentor Muraki and the university. The sixth piece of evidence is Kyoto University’s decision to revoke the doctorate degree. The seventh piece of evidence is the “Appeal Review Decision” issued by the Kyoto University Student Appeals Committee. The eighth piece of evidence is the notification of the revocation decision.

Reach the proof.

In the courtroom, stacks of Zhuze's documents were displayed in front of everyone.

Just the appearance of this thick stack of A4 paper showed how strict the procedures for Kyoto University's decision to revoke degrees were. The university executives present could not help but reveal their emotions when they saw how detailed the information was.

Smile. The copper and iron walls built up by the accumulation of these materials are by no means so easy to penetrate.

Only Takezawa's somewhat cold voice was heard to continue: "The above evidence proves that on August 31, 2019, Kyoto University decided to inquire about the situation from Mikiko herself after completing the internal investigation process of Mikiko's thesis.

, conducted an interview. On September 3, 2019, Kyoto University internally determined 7 senior professors to participate in the interview with Mikiko. For details of the professors attending, please refer to the list determined by the relevant expert group meeting. After the professors participating in the interview were determined, Kyoto University

Immediately sent an email to Mikiko informing her of the interview location. Mikiko replied that she agreed to participate in the meeting."

"On September 15, 2020, at 2 pm, seven members of the expert team came to classroom A303 of the Biology Building of Kyoto University. In the classroom, seven professors conducted an interview with Mikiko for about 3 hours to learn more about

Relevant circumstances as to whether the paper involved constitutes plagiarism.”

"The investigation transcript submitted by the defendant's attorney shows that -" Takezawa flipped through the information in his hand, "beginning on page 5 of the transcript, the expert team asked Mikiko, 'Do you have any opinions to express regarding whether the paper constitutes plagiarism?'" The transcript begins on page 5.

8 pages, recording the expert panel’s question ‘Please describe the reasons why your paper does not constitute plagiarism’.”

"These questions can show that the professors in the expert group who participated in the meeting gave Mikiko a full opportunity to defend and make statements. We can also see from the investigation transcript that Mikiko also denied that her behavior constituted plagiarism at the beginning. However, in the expert group,

Under the promotion and influence of the members, Mikiko explained to Mikiko in detail the academic standards for identifying plagiarism in papers. Finally, Mikiko admitted to the expert group that her behavior constituted plagiarism. And that night, Mikiko submitted a "Reflection Letter" to the expert group to reflect on her own plagiarism.

Behavior. The "Reflection Letter" is included together with the investigation transcript as an attachment."

Takezawa raised his head and pointed his finger at the signature handwriting on the side of the A4 paper of the "Investigation Transcript" and said: "Each page of the investigation transcript has Mikiko's signature, which can show that she has fully approved the contents recorded in the investigation transcript.

Approved.”

The veteran lawyer's words continued one after another.

Every link is closely linked to each other.

It's like closing into a perfect chain.

This lawyer who escaped from the civil service system has both the aggressiveness of a lawyer and the rigor of official documents. These two advantages come together to form a unique attack that hides needles in the thick of things.

She continued: "After receiving Mikiko's "Reflection Letter", the Kyoto University expert group, based on a full review of the "Investigation Transcript" and in line with the rigor of degree awarding and deprivation, decided to arrange again for Mikiko's mentor Muraki and her

Another conversation was held to understand. On October 5, 2014, Muraki had a meeting with Mikiko and the office for about an hour. Mikiko still admitted in this meeting that her behavior constituted plagiarism, and there was no change in the previous expert group meeting.

Attitude."

"Subsequently, Kyoto University based on the expert group's analysis report on the Eucalyptus-related papers, Mikiko's own admission in the investigation transcript, and her confession in the "Reflection", combined with the above factual materials and evidence, determined that the two articles published by Mikiko

There is plagiarism in these papers, which constitutes serious academic misconduct. And since the above two papers are academic achievements included in Mikiko's application for a doctorate, it should be determined that the thesis materials used to obtain her degree contain serious academic misconduct, and the university needs

The plaintiff’s doctorate degree is revoked in accordance with internal regulations.”

"After that, Kyoto University officially made a decision to revoke Mikiko's doctorate. The relevant decision was sent to Mikiko by mail and email. After receiving the decision, Mikiko appealed against the university's decision. The corresponding appeal committee also made a decision to reject the appeal.

.”

Takezawa took a deep breath and raised his voice: "To sum up, judging from the evidence provided by the defendant's attorney, Kyoto University fully demonstrated the rigor that a university should have in the process of revoking the plaintiff Mikiko's doctorate.

, serious and responsible attitude. During the investigation process, relevant experts and scholars were always involved. The university fully respected the professional opinions of the academic staff and also listened to the statements and opinions of the persons under investigation. Throughout the process, from

From the establishment of the expert group to the investigation of the papers involved, to the interview process, and finally to the relevant decision to revoke the degree and served it to the plaintiff."

"The entire process fully demonstrated that the university initiated the degree revocation procedure in strict accordance with internal regulations, followed the corresponding procedural regulations from beginning to end, and gave the respondent Mikiko a full opportunity to defend herself. It shows that the university takes academic misconduct seriously.

, never let go of a highly responsible attitude. The entire process complied with the regulations, and the decision to revoke the doctorate was made with sufficient facts and evidence. The relevant decision-making procedures were legal, demonstrating an unforgiving attitude towards academic misconduct, and brooking no challenge from the plaintiff!

"

The raised sound of Zhuzawa's voice echoed throughout the courtroom.
Chapter completed!