An Ombudsman’s investigation into a claim of unqualified examiners has prompted the University of Malta to declare that its senate’s “academic supremacy” is beyond external scrutiny.

Education Commissioner Vincent De Gaetano launched an investigation after a master’s student accused the university of “wilful negligence”, by appointing a board of examiners that did not have the necessary experience in the subject matter of his dissertation.

The commissioner agreed with the student, finding that the lack of relevant expertise by two of the board’s three examiners “doomed” the assessment of the dissertation.

The university, however, did not appear to take kindly to the scrutiny.

In a letter addressed to De Gaetano, a former chief justice, university pro-rector Carmen Sammut argued that the composition of a board of examiners cannot be reviewed by the education commissioner.

Sammut argued that the backbone of the University of Malta is its academic autonomy and that the law is clear insofar as the “academic supremacy” of the university’s senate.

The pro-rector said implementing the commissioner’s recommendation to reconstitute the board of examiners to re-evaluate the dissertation “runs counter to the principle of autonomy and academic freedom”.

Sammut further argued that the student had chosen not to exhaust all potential remedies at university level, and the examination board members were “adequately placed” to holistically assess the dissertation.

The education commissioner replied to Sammut, saying the suggestion that the “academic supremacy of the senate” puts it beyond scrutiny runs contrary to the “clear wording of the law”.

Ombudsman and former chief justice Vincent de Gaetano. Photo: Matthew Mirabelli

Such an approach was a “disservice to our Alma Mater, fostering as it does at best a perceived culture of academic arrogance and at worst one of institutional impunity”.

De Gaetano sent copies of the exchange to the prime minister and parliament’s speaker.

Ethnomusicology dissertation assessed by economist, political scientist

In his final opinion on the matter, published on Monday, De Gaetano said the case was of general interest as it highlighted the need for diligence when faculties and institutes proposed members of examining boards, particularly for master’s and higher degrees.

A mature student registered with the Islands and Small States Institute had complained of unfair treatment in the course of the examination and grading of his dissertation on ethnomusicology.

One of the examiners was described by the ombudsman’s office as “an eminent political scientist,” while the other was an “eminent economist”.

The third examiner was found by the ombudsman to have the necessary expertise to grade the dissertation.

“It is significant and, indeed striking, that out of the three effective members of the board of examiners the highest individual mark was awarded by the member of the board with expertise in ethnomusicology, particularly that of small states,” the education commissioner noted.

The commissioner’s recommendation, rejected by the university, was for the board of examiners to be reconstituted with people having the appropriate expertise to re-evaluate the dissertation.