A historian committed research misconduct when she claimed that a Jewish concentration camp prisoner had a lesbian affair with an SS guard, a university investigation has ruled.

There was ¡°insufficient evidence¡± to support the allegation of a physical relationship made by Anna H¨¢jkov¨¢, associate professor of modern continental European history at the University of Warwick, according to a panel convened by the institution. It also concluded that the ethical approval that should have been sought for the research was not in place beforehand.

Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢ was previously fined €4,000 (?3,523) by a German court for breaching an injunction that forbade her from using the name of the Holocaust survivor ¨C who died around 10 years ago ¨C or her photograph in relation to the claim without her daughter¡¯s permission. The fine was imposed because material by Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢ that breached the injunction remained online, reported last year.

An article by Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢, published in an Oxford University Press journal on German history, is now listed as ¡°temporarily withdrawn¡±.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

A letter to the woman¡¯s daughter from Warwick registrar Rachel Sandby-Thomas, outlining the results of the research misconduct investigation, has been seen by Times Higher Education.

It says Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢ should apologise to the prisoner¡¯s daughter for the ¡°distress¡± caused by their dialogue in 2014. It was previously reported that Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢ promised the daughter that year that she would not use her mother¡¯s full name in her work, but later claimed to have forgotten this pledge.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

The Jewish woman met the Nazi guard at a concentration camp in Hamburg in 1944.

Following the outcome, her daughter said: ¡°I¡¯m pleased that the panel has concluded that there was insufficient evidence to claim a physical relationship between my mother and the Nazi guard. After having spoken to my mother and confirmation from a living witness about what happened, I¡¯m certain the ¡®relationship¡¯ was never sexual.¡±

Following its findings, the Warwick panel recommended that the journal article by Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢ should be ¡°reviewed in detail¡± by her ¡°and a senior academic colleague¡± to clarify issues including ¡°the position with regards to the non-anonymous use of archives¡± and ¡°potential factual inconsistencies¡±; that she should ¡°undertake best endeavours to contact all relevant third parties to ensure that all references made to a physical relationship¡± between the woman and the guard ¡°are removed from the internet¡±, with the university overseeing this process; and that she should undergo research integrity training.

The panel also recommends that Warwick ¡°progresses the issues raised within the investigation in a process outside of the research misconduct enquiry¡±.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Daniel Sokol, the daughter¡¯s barrister, welcomed the panel¡¯s finding of research misconduct.

¡°It has been a slow process which has taken a heavy toll on my client.?We hope the university will honour its commitment to prevent further scholarly misconduct and allow my client to get on with her life,¡± he said.

A Warwick spokesman confirmed that the panel¡¯s recommendations ¡°have been accepted in their entirety and implemented¡± but added that since there were ¡°still active processes ongoing in relation to this matter¡± the university ¡°cannot comment further until those processes are completely concluded¡±.

In a statement issued by the University and College Union on behalf of Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢, her caseworker said: ¡°The university¡¯s processes have not yet concluded in regard to this matter, so it is not possible for Dr H¨¢jkov¨¢ to comment on the case at this stage as she, unlike the complainant, is bound by the university¡¯s confidentiality requirements.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

john.morgan@timeshighereducation.com