Code of Ethics
of the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics
of Charles University¹

as amended by Dean’s Directive No. 9/2024

Article 2 in Part I of the Constitution of the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University (hereinafter referred to also as the “FMP CU” or the “Faculty”) states that “the Faculty (…) carries out its scientific, research, development, innovative, and other creative activities (…) and educational activity independently and freely, and creates the conditions for these activities (…).” This Code of Ethics of the FMP CU (hereinafter referred to as the “Code”) is issued in the spirit of that declaration and to ensure appropriate conditions for the above-mentioned activities.

Part I
General Principles of Ethical Conduct

1. All members of the academic community, researchers, and other employees of the Faculty comply with the laws and other legal regulations of the Czech Republic, as well as with the internal regulations of Charles University (including its Code of Ethics) and the internal regulations of the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics.
2. In their relations between each other and in their relations with the members of the academic community, researchers, and other employees of Charles University, as well as in public activities within the national and international human community, all members of the academic community, researchers, and other employees of the Faculty act in accordance with the following general principles:
   1. they respect the academic rights and freedoms of others;
   2. they respect the freedom of thought, conscience, worldview, research, and artistic expression of others;
   3. they avoid deliberately misleading others and any kind of deliberate dishonest or fraudulent conduct;
   4. they avoid excessive verbal and physical aggression and do not publicly glorify acts of violence committed by others;
   5. they treat other people with appropriate respect and dignity;
   6. they do not promote the activities of political parties, political movements, and groups on the campus and do not associate their work at the Faculty with political activities;
   7. they do not engage in any form of discrimination (bullying, abuse of authority, sexual and other harassment – see Part II of this Code for more details);
   8. they observe the principles of ethics as they apply to scientific work (see Part III of this Code for more details); and
   9. they sensitively and objectively assess situations where their actions may result in a conflict of interest and adhere to the recommendations set out in Part IV of this Code.
3. The provisions of the previous paragraph apply with the necessary modifications to all participants of events organized by the Faculty (correspondence seminars, summer schools and camps, lifelong learning, etc.).
4. If it is found that a principle given in paragraph 2 (a – g) or (i) has been violated, all members of the academic community, researchers, and other employees proceed according to Article 5 of this Code; if it is found that a principle given in paragraph 2 (h) has been violated, then they proceed according to Article 10 of this Code.

Part II
Discrimination: Its Forms and Examples

Article 1
Discrimination

1. Discrimination is defined as an act or omission of a duty to act where one person or group of persons is treated less favourably than another person or group of persons is in a comparable situation, for example, because of their race, ethnic origin, nationality, citizenship, sex, gender, sexual orientation, age, health condition, religion, faith, or worldview, etc. Discrimination on the grounds of sex and gender also includes discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy, maternity, or paternity, as well as discrimination on the grounds of sexual or gender identity.
2. Instructing or inciting another person to discriminate is also deemed to constitute discrimination.
3. Forms of discrimination include, for example, bullying, abuse of authority (including so-called “bossing”), sexual and sexualized harassment, etc.; some manifestations of discrimination may involve the characteristics of more than one of these forms.

Article 2
Bullying

1. Bullying is defined as any behaviour that is intended in particular to harm, threaten, humiliate, or intimidate another person or group of persons. It is the purposeful and repeated use of physical and/or psychological attacks by an individual or group of persons against another individual or group of persons. Specifically, it may include any verbal or physical act or any form of expression made through electronic media that is intended to cause physical harm or excessive emotional or psychological strain, thereby adversely affecting the ability of another person or group of persons to carry out their usual activities, in particular to participate in educational programmes, scholarly and research activities, or other activities related to the academic, scientific, and social environment of the Faculty and University.
2. Both students and teachers, as well as other employees of the Faculty, may be the perpetrators or victims of bullying.

Article 3
Abuse of Authority

1. As a result of their formal position in the university environment, a teacher in particular, as well as senior employees, gain significant authority and powers. In the case of teachers, as well as other employees, this is specifically academic, administrative, supervisory, and evaluative authority or influence over students. Abuse of authority takes many different forms and varies in severity; it includes the following examples of discriminatory behaviour, particularly where they are committed repeatedly and over a prolonged period of time and directed against a person or group of persons. They are primarily:
   1. favouritism and other forms of unjustified preferential treatment of one person over others in a comparable position;
   2. discrimination against a person in a subordinate position, for example, on the basis of sex, gender, sexual orientation, age, racial or ethnic identity, health condition, religion, or worldview;
   3. demands to perform tasks of a private nature or even tasks of a work-related nature that are substantially beyond the scope of the employee’s job description or for which the subordinate is not qualified or that are not feasible in the given context;
   4. demands to perform tasks that are substantially beyond the scope of the student’s duties set out in his curriculum;
   5. frequent and unjustified criticism of work or ridicule in front of third parties; and;
   6. passing off the work of a subordinate as that of a superior.
2. Special cases of abuse of authority are situations that may arise as a result of close familial or partnership ties or consensual intimate relationships, or as a result of repeated attempts to initiate intimate relationships between persons that are in a position of superiority and subordination to each other or in a position of teacher and student. Conflicts of interest arise and abuse of authority may occur in particular when one of the persons has administrative, supervisory, evaluative, or other authority or influence over the other. In such cases, the abuse of authority may be avoided, for example, if the person concerned delegates his relevant authority entirely or sufficiently to another person who is not in conflict of interest.

Article 4
Sexual and Sexualized Harassment

1. Sexual harassment means undesired conduct that is sexual in nature or has sexual overtones and that aims to or results in taking away another person’s dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment or that may be reasonably perceived as a form of behaviour required from the person affected in exchange for decisions influencing his rights and obligations arising from legal relationships. Specifically, it may include, for example, sexual advances, offering benefits contingent on intimate conduct, or, conversely, threatening another person with a sanction if he refuses (e.g., in return for awarding of credit points, examination, or a good grade from an examination, securing a promotion or a better job, granting a financial advantage or reward or other benefits).
2. Sexualized harassment means sexual harassment that is not based on a sexual desire but on the use of sexuality as a tool of power or domination. It includes, in particular, various forms of psychological coercion with sexual or gender overtones, such as different treatment of persons on the basis of sex or gender, unsolicited materials depicting women or men as sexual objects, the display and distribution of pornographic materials, taking photographs or video recordings without prior and uncoerced agreement, or making derogatory remarks with sexual or gender overtones.

Article 5
Steps to Be Taken in the Case of Detecting any Form of Discrimination or Breach of the General Principles of Ethical Conduct

1. If any member of the academic community of the Faculty or a researcher at the Faculty or any other employee of the Faculty or a participant in an event organized by the Faculty has been a victim of any form of discrimination, has witnessed any form of discrimination or breach of the general principles of ethical conduct, or has a reasonable suspicion that discriminatory conduct or breach of the general principles of ethical conduct has occurred, he will initiate an investigation of such an incident in accordance with the rules set out below.
2. If the complaint is made by an employee of the Faculty and it is a complaint to investigate the inappropriate conduct:
   1. of a member of the academic staff or a researcher, the employee will notify the Ombudsman or the Dean of the Faculty of the conduct or suspected conduct;
   2. of a member of the technical and economic staff of the Faculty or a person with whom the Faculty has signed an agreement to perform work or complete a job, the employee will notify the Ombudsman or the Secretary to the Faculty of the conduct or suspected conduct; or
   3. of a student of the Faculty, the employee will notify the Vice-Dean for Student Affairs of the conduct or suspected conduct.
3. If the complaint is made by a student of the Faculty, the student may:
   1. use all options set out in paragraph 2 of this Article depending on the classification of the person to whom the complaint relates;
   2. contact a representative of the Student Chamber of the Academic Senate of the FMP CU and consult with him about further steps; or
   3. contact the coordinator of counselling services and the contact person for students with special needs and consult with him about further steps or use other options specified on the Faculty website.

   Further information on sexual and sexualized harassment or violence and on what to do if one is a victim may also be found on the website providing a list of counselling services available at FMP CU.

4. In all of the above-mentioned situations, it is also possible to contact the Charles University Ombudsman. All practical information and contacts can also be found on the website of the Charles University Ombudsman or the Carolina Centre.

Part III
Ethics of Scientific Work

Article 6
Introductory Provisions

Adherence to the ethics of scientific work applies to all members of the academic community of the Faculty and researchers at the Faculty and all levels of creative work, from student papers to scholarly publications and team projects by members of the academic staff and researchers at the Faculty. Knowledge of the principles of ethics of scientific work is one of the basic duties of every member of the academic community of the Faculty and every researcher at the Faculty. Any breach of these principles is a serious ethical failure that always results in the imposition of liability and potential sanctions. The following text is based on the provisions of the Code of Ethics of Charles University and specifies the principles of ethics of scientific work that are applied at the Faculty.

Article 7
Basic Ethical Principles of Scientific Work

1. The principles of good practice in scientific work include in particular:
   1. adherence to generally accepted principles of scientific work according to the customary practices typical for the given field of research;
   2. complete and truthful documentation of working research procedures and results where the preparation of such documentation is of disciplinary relevance;
   3. complete and truthful citation of all sources used, including of findings based on artificial intelligence (see also Article 8 of this Code), while, at the same time, citing only those sources whose ideas, methodology, or results are relevant for the given publication output;
   4. full and truthful acknowledgment of collaborators and not acknowledging a co-author who has not contributed to the output in any way;
   5. the fact that there is a verifiable record of the publication of a text, including basic bibliographical data, and that the published text is publicly traceable, unless serious reasons (work with classified information, etc.) prevent this;
   6. protection of primary data and material basis of the department or Faculty where the research has been or is being carried out at least for a period sufficient for the proper presentation of the research in publication outputs; this applies particularly to cases where the research data are not deliberately and purposefully made available to the professional public; at the same time, however, publication of material basis and primary data of the scientific work if their nature and character allow such publication; and
   7. avoidance of conflicts of interest in scientific work (see also Part IV of this Code), that is, a situation in which the personal, professional, or public, interests of one person or a group of persons come into conflict in any activity related to creative work, in particular in a review procedure, competitive hiring procedure, assessment of materials submitted in any type of scientific evaluation, or associate and full professorship appointment procedures, etc.

Article 8
Issues with the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Scientific Work

1. As modern technologies and artificial intelligence tools (hereinafter referred to as the “AI”) such as ChatGPT develop, it is necessary to set the boundaries for their use. The fundamental ethical principle is that the user of AI tools bears responsibility for the use of these tools. All AI outputs must be approached critically. These outputs may be based on outdated, unbalanced, or incorrect data, may be subject to random factors, biases, undesired prejudices (e.g., racial, gender, or cultural prejudices, etc.), and other influences which are difficult to predict.
2. When using AI tools, it is necessary to observe the following rules in particular:
   1. AI tools may be used only for supporting activities and the author is responsible for the accuracy of the results and data obtained if he chooses to use them.
   2. The author of the text is solely responsible for the resulting text submitted for publication or published using electronic communication tools, as well as for the quality and truthfulness of the inputs used when communicating with AI tools. The author of the text is also responsible for ensuring that the inputs provided by him for communication with AI tools are not subject to the provisions on personal data protection (GDPR) or trade secrets, that they are not protected by copyright, or that the licensing terms of the data used in the input allow it to be used in this way.
   3. Tools based on artificial intelligence are not considered to be co-authors of the work nor are they listed in the references used. However, the use of such tools in a creative scientific work must be expressly mentioned in the text and specifically identified, for example, as follows: “ChatGPT 3.5. was used in the preparation of the text (or a specific part of the text)”. Appropriate ways of doing so include, for example, using a footnote referring to the passage of text in question, including a possible reference to a conversation that has taken place with programs of ChatGPT type. If it is not specified in which parts of the text AI was used, the statement acknowledging its use will be applied to the entire paper.
   4. Unacknowledged use of AI tools in creative scientific work is in principle as much a breach of the ethics of scientific work as plagiarism.
   5. When preparing a scientific text, it is necessary to respect the rules of the journal or conference where the text is to be published.
3. When using AI tools, it is also possible to consult the Charles University website at https://ai.cuni.cz, which provides guidelines and recommendations not only for creative but also for pedagogical work, or to consult the opinion of Charles University on the issue at https://ai.cuni.cz/AI-17.html.

Article 9
Ethical Misconduct in Scientific Work

1. The following deliberate acts are considered ethical misconduct in scientific work:
   1. Falsification of data, presentation of fabricated data, presentation of selective information (“cherry-picking”), gross misinterpretation of data, or use of an obviously incorrect method of data analysis.
   2. All forms of publishing which are demonstrably motivated by the intention to gain an unfair advantage; in particular:

      i. practices that abuse data analyses or use purposive data selection so that results may be presented as statistically significant;

      ii. plagiarism, i.e., copyright infringement by stealing or appropriating another author’s work, idea, formulation, or data;

      iii. self-plagiarism, i.e., the unacknowledged publication of one’s own already published text with no or only minor differences and its presentation as a new text; and

      iv. publishing on dubious platforms, in particular the so-called predatory journals and publishers.

2. Plagiarism and knowingly assisting plagiarism are particularly serious breaches of the ethics of scientific work. Plagiarism is committed by anyone who presents the work of others as his own or uses the work of others in his work without clearly acknowledging this fact. Specifically, plagiarism is committed by anyone:
   1. who quotes, presents, or paraphrases passages of text without properly citing the sources in printed, electronic, or other publications; it includes also quoting, presenting, or paraphrasing his own texts and texts created by means of AI;
   2. who quotes or paraphrases the ideas, hypotheses, themes, or specific practices of others without properly citing the sources; and
   3. who commissions another person to produce a work or part of a work which it is his task to produce and which he subsequently presents under his own name, or anyone who provides such service.

Article 10
Procedure Adopted in Cases of a Breach of Ethics of Scientific Work

1. The Faculty of Mathematics and Physics of Charles University has a Research Ethics Commission the constitution of which, along with the description of its activities, is the subject of a separate Dean’s directive.
2. In the event that any member of the academic community of the Faculty, any researcher at the Faculty, or any other employee of the Faculty discovers a fact that gives rise to a suspicion of a breach of ethics in a scientific work, he will proceed according to one of the following courses of action:
   1. He will notify his superior (or, depending on the nature or potential severity of the breach of ethics, the head of the department or the appropriate Vice-Dean or Dean) of the fact. Depending on the possible severity of the breach of ethics, the officials notified may contact their superiors or initiate an investigation by the Research Ethics Commission at the FMP CU.
   2. He will make a direct referral to the Research Ethics Commission of the FMP CU for investigation.
   3. In the event that he suspects that there has been a breach of the Code of Ethics of Charles University in relation to a scientific work, he will make a direct referral to the Ethics Commission of Charles University. He will notify the Dean of the Faculty of the fact that he has taken such action.

Part IV
Special Arrangements Regarding Conflict of Interest Issues

Article 11
Subject Matter

In the context of the academic environment, a conflict of interest is defined as a situation in which the personal, professional, or public interests of one person or a group of persons come into conflict in any activity associated with creative or pedagogical work, in particular in the case of a review procedure, competitive hiring procedure, any type of evaluation, including the assessment of materials submitted as part of this evaluation, or associate and full professorship appointment procedures, etc. In addition to the generally applicable principles for avoiding conflicts of interest, the following clarifications are made under this Code.

Article 12
Special Arrangements Regarding Conflicts of Interest in Competitive Hiring Procedures at the FMP CU Conducted in Accordance with the Competitive Hiring Process Code of CU

1. For the purpose of further specifying the first sentence of Article 3 (6) of the Competitive Hiring Process Code of CU which states: “A person whose impartiality may be questioned due to the person’s relationship to an applicant may not be a member of the Commission” (in short, “a member of the Commission who has a conflict of interest”), this article sets out situations in which it is appropriate and expedient to consider whether a conflict of interest exists. This concerns in particular the following situations:
   1. The applicant and the commission member have been in a Ph.D. student – supervisor relationship within the last 10 years.
   2. The applicant and the commission member have co-authored at least 3 articles within the last 10 years or have published, submitted for publication, or have had in preparation at least 1 article within the last 3 years (except for publications of major collaborations).
   3. The commission member was the author of a letter of recommendation for the applicant for the current competitive hiring procedure.
   4. In the case of a competitive hiring procedure for an AP2 (or AP3 or AP4) position, participation of the applicant and the commission member in a collaborative grant project within the last 3 years is also considered a potential conflict of interest.
   5. The applicant and the commission member are or have been in a relationship that may cast doubt on the impartiality of the commission member (family or other close relationship, etc.).

Article 13
Special Arrangements Regarding Conflicts of Interest in Appointing Associate Professorship and Evaluation Commissions

1. In addition to the requirements set out in Act No.: 111/1998 to regulate higher education institutions, in Section 72 (5) and Section 74 (3), and by the Code of Procedure for the Granting of Associate Professorship and Full Professorship of CU, Article 2 (2) and (3) and Article 8 (2), and by Rector’s Directive No.: 55/2023, Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Procedure for the Granting of Associate Professorship and Full Professorship, it is recommended that the proposal for the appointment of the relevant commission should fulfil the following requirements (see also the Minutes of the 6^th Meeting of the Scientific Board of FMP CU of 5 March 2014, item II (2)):
   1. The commission member has not co-authored any publications with the applicant within the last 10 years, except for publications from major scientific collaborations.
   2. The commission member has not been a supervisor or advisor to the applicant during his Ph.D. studies.
   3. The commission member is not a direct superior or direct subordinate of the applicant.
   4. The chairman of the commission is not from the same department as the applicant.
2. In the event that any of these requirements are not fulfilled, the proposal of the given commission must include the reasons why they have not done so.

Article 14
Special Arrangements Regarding Conflicts of Interest in the Meetings of the Scientific Board of the FMP CU

1. In order to ensure impartial decision-making, the Scientific Board of the FMP CU has resolved that it is the duty of its members to observe the following principles of conduct in conflicts of interests (see also the Annex to the Minutes of the Scientific Board of the FMP CU of 5 April 2023).
2. A member of the Scientific Board of the FMP CU has a conflict of interest in the consideration of an item of the meeting of the Scientific Board of the FMP CU if the matter under consideration concerns a person who:
   1. has co-authored at least 3 articles with the member within the last 10 years or has published, submitted for publication, or has had in preparation with the member at least 1 article within the last 3 years (except for publications of major collaborations);
   2. cooperates or has cooperated on a collaborative grant project with the member within the last 3 years;
   3. is or has been in a Ph.D. student – supervisor relationship with the member;
   4. is in the relationship of a direct superior or direct subordinate with the member;
   5. is or has been in a relationship with the member that may cast doubt on the member’s impartiality (family or other close relationship, etc.);
   6. has a relationship of scientific rivalry or professional enmity with the member; or
   7. has common economic interests, e.g., co-ownership of a company, with the member.
3. In situations mentioned in the previous paragraph, the member of the Scientific Board of the FMP CU will proceed as follows:
   1. if he discovers that he has a conflict of interest, he will notify the plenary session of the Scientific Board of this act;
   2. if he feels that a conflict of interest has not been declared, he will draw attention to this fact;
   3. he will consider whether he should leave the meeting room for the duration of a discussion in which a conflict of interest might arise;
   4. when a conflict of interest arises, he will participate in the debate only to the extent that will be absolutely necessary;
   5. in the event of a conflict of interest, he will vote only if a certain number of affirmative votes of all members of the Scientific Board is required for a decision (usually in associate and full professorship appointment procedures); and
   6. he will not participate in a vote concerning his person, even if the vote is in accordance with the previous point.
4. The rules of paragraph 3 (a) – © apply with the necessary modifications also to other participants in the meetings of the Scientific Board of the FMP CU in a conflict of interest. Before a participant in the meeting of the Scientific Board takes the floor, he will be warned about his duty to declare any conflict of interest and will be told about its definition by the person chairing the meeting of the Scientific Board.

The text of the Code of Ethics of the FMP CU was discussed with the union organization of the FMP CU on 16 November 2023.

The text of the Code of Ethics of the FMP CU was adopted by the Academic Senate of the FMP CU on 29 November 2023.

The text of the Code of Ethics of the FMP CU was discussed by the Scientific Board of the FMP CU on 6 December 2023.

The text of the Code of Ethics of the FMP CU was approved by the management of the FMP CU on 20 December 2023.

¹ Translator’s note: Words importing the masculine include the feminine, and unless the context otherwise requires, words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular.