the president’s lawyer peter castleEduardo Pachas, spoke regarding the complaint made by the Sunday program ‘Panorama’, which broadcast a report stating that the master’s thesis of the head of state and the first lady, Lilia Paredes, has 54% plagiarism.
Faced with this, Pachas accepted that the intention of the president and his spouse might be dishonest, but clarified that there is a legal framework, Therefore, the responsibility would not lie with the students, but with the advisor and the members of the jury..
“It may be dishonest, but there is a legal framework here. I have not seen the thesis, but I have seen the report, I have seen the pages, I have made an analysis and in response to this there is already an investigation. The university has released a statement that they are already analyzing and investigating it. From the point of view of criminal law, the mastery of the fact is not held by the student in any of the theses and there is already jurisprudence in that line”, he declared in dialogue with Canal N.
In that sense, he asserted that one thing is plagiarism with “bad faith, maliciously” and a different one is an academic mistake, as he assured that it is in this case. Therefore, he pointed out that there are filters and clarified that following the thesis passes through the advisor, it goes to the academic record and later to the jury.
READ MORE | Pedro Castillo was sued for plagiarism: What legal and administrative consequences can he face?
“In these cases, it has already been pointed out that the one who is responsible and those who control the fact are the members of the jury, since they are the ones who examine, validate. Thus, when the student exhibits, the jury can deny it and not give him the title. The jurors can get together and say that indeed there are quotes that have not been indicated and there would be a kind of plagiarism”, he added
Alleged academic fraud
In the report issued by ‘Panorama’, an alleged academic fraud of the work carried out by Castle Lumps y Navarro Wallssince they pointed out that two of the people who supposedly validated the workshops and questionnaires they used for their research do not exist.
In turn, they reported that there is a third person, called Erick Carlo Figueroa Coronado, who gave the go-ahead to use these instruments. However, this also turned out to be the jury for the support of the thesis.
