February 2021

Question: a student made a complaint to the Rector stating that their rights had been violated by the behaviour of a student representative under "[...] the Code of Ethics, the Student Honor Code and the Carta dei diritti e doveri degli studenti". The student also made a formal request to initiate a procedure against the student representative pursuant the Code of Ethics and the Student Regulations, with the primary objective of protecting their privacy.

Opinion: the Committee first of all points out that the Student Honor Code, issued by Rector's Decree no. 416 of 13 June 2016, specifically provides that students can contact the Student Ombudsperson both to encourage behavior compliant with the Honor Code and the Code of Ethics and to avoid sanctionable behaviour. Furthermore, the Student Regulations, issued by the same Rector's Decree no. 416 of 13 June 2016, defines the tasks of the Student Ombudsperson and its disciplinary procedure, which includes the exam of student reports, received in written or verbal form, which cannot be anonymous. Once the Ombudsperson has conducted an investigation, where there has been a violation of the Student Honor Code, of the Code of Ethics or of the University regulations, he or she transmits its evaluation to the competent body. 

Based on this premise, the Committee for the implementation of the Code of Ethics recalls its previous opinion to the Academic Senate of April 2017, in which it suggested to "... promote actions to increase knowledge of the role of the Student Ombudperson, who is available to all students and can help in similar situations".

In conclusion, in light of the note from the Rector of 22 February 2021 to all student representatives - in which he underlines the importance of respecting the principles and rules on the protection of personal data, describing the guidelines that all student representatives must follow in the processing of personal data that they may become aware of in the performance of their duties - the Committee for the implementation of the Code of Ethics is of the opinion that the objective of the reporting student has been adequately achieved.

February - June 2021 

Question: the Rector asked the Committee to examine a report received from a student about a member of an exam committee who allegedly publicly accused them during an oral discussion on Zoom to have copied their paper. After this fact, the student, frightened and embarrassed, was unable to refute what they were accused of and obtained, in their opinion, a "probably lower grade than they deserved". The case was received by the Committee when their term of office was about to expire, so it was forwarded to the newly appointed Committee on 19 April 2021.

Opinion: the Committee in office has accepted the recommendation proposed by the previous Committee which, in transmitting the relevant documents, recalled the importance of the role of the Student Ombudsperson as the key interlocutor for this kind of reports. After the hearings, the Committee found that the facts were, in part, correctly reported and interpreted. The communication among the parties may have been hampered by the distance mode, which may have given rise to tensions, but the Committee found no intentional bias on the part of the faculty member, nor any intention to offend anyone; 

in view of the above, the Committee

• finds that there has not been a violation of the provisions of article 6 of the Code of Ethics regarding respect for the individual (lack of seriousness, lack of intention, ...), and therefore is of the opinion that no further action should be taken pursuant to article 18 of the Code of Ethics;
• believes, however, that the student did experience discomfort and this cannot be ignored. The University must therefore adopt appropriate measures to ensure that students can participate in teaching and learning activities through a normal student-faculty relationship. Particular attention must be paid in the case of distance student-faculty relationship, which may lead to misunderstandings and conflicts that would not occur in a face to face context.