Audit confirms gift of points to an applicant and violation of UMSA rules in call for teachers

“Do you know of any corruption? Report it! (…) We reopened the Transparency Unit (…). Don’t keep quiet because a transparent university is possible,” says the Rector of the Universidad Mayor de San Andrés (UMSA), María Eugenia García, emphatically in a video released on July 11.

Paradoxically, around those same days, the same Rector who promised transparency refused to provide two UMSA teachers with a copy of the Internal Audit report 008/2024 (I have the request letters). Without information there is no transparency. Both challenged in May 2023 the 2022 Call for the Merit Competition and Competency Exams for the Social Communication Degree. Today, they denounce the violation of their right to information.

Due to this strange refusal, I reviewed the case that had been publicly reported on May 21, 2023. I obtained the Audit report and saw that it confirmed the irregularities pointed out by the teachers who challenged the call.

1. “The RMA candidate for the subject of Writing III, in the evaluation stage of merits, was overqualified by 2 points for having obtained a second master’s degree, resulting in the winner by that weighting. In this regard, in the documents presented by the applicant, the second Master’s degree, considered in the evaluation of merits, is not evident, only the certificate of graduation obtained in a private university (Sic) is evident,” says the audit in point 3, subtitle 2.4.
2. “The designation and/or appointment of the Student Teaching Commission for the evaluation of merits and competence were designated by the director of the communication career through memoranda with previous character to the evaluation of merits and examination of competence (…) According to the First Article of the Resolution of the Honorable University Council No. 049/2002 of March 13, 2002 ‘The courts for the merit competition and examinations of competence must be appointed in the corresponding Career Council or Faculty”, indicates point 1, subtitle 2.4.
3. The report also states that on March 7 and April 4, 2023 – after the entire irregular process had already taken place – the Facultative Council regularized the designation of the merit and competence courts.

• After committing the irregularity, the dean of Social Sciences, Edgar Pomar, consulted the Legal Department if he could regularize the commissions nominated by hand. The Legal Department responded on May 15, 2023 that NO. “It is our responsibility to clarify that within the University there is NO rule or regulation that allows the regularization of University Co-Government Commissions”… for the purposes of processes in academic calls,” argues note A.JUR 1800/2023. In simple terms, the Legal Department told the Dean that the entire process was illegal, therefore it is not valid.

1. That resolution of the CAU that annulled the call for serious irregularities was signed by the Vice-Chancellor at the time, María Eugenia García. On July 24, the same María Eugenia García, this time in her role as Chancellor, signed the resolution of the HCU that confirms the serious irregularities. Can the HCU review its decisions? Of course, as long as the “I cover for you today, you tomorrow” approach does not prevail. I suppose that its members read the reports and see the evidence before raising their hands.
2. The Internal Audit Office says “there are some observations that are not relevant to the process, such as the designation of merit committees and competency exams.” Is it not relevant that the merit tribunal appointed by hand “over-evaluated” a candidate so that she “would win”? That is corruption. If that Tribunal had been appointed by lottery and legally, it would not have given points to anyone.

Evidence not considered

The internal audit did not take into account in its information gathering the evidence attached to the challenge of a dozen teachers. One of the pieces of evidence, an apocryphal report from the merits commission that appeared on February 28, 2022. In that report, “someone” increased points for two applicants (5 and 6.5, respectively). The director of Communication at that time admitted that there were three reports, in a statement to El Diario on April 19, 2023 (https://n9.cl/nca5e). According to regulations, there can only be two reports.

The Audit Office should have requested information from the teachers who challenged the rules and not limited itself to analyzing the documents sent by the authorities accused of cheating. Do you have to be very naive to believe that a cheater would send evidence against himself?

CScientists at University College London have found that the negative emotional reaction caused by dishonest acts diminishes as the dishonest person commits new small transgressions. The scientific journal Nature revealed that human beings have biological mechanisms that try to avoid dishonest behaviour, but repeated dishonest acts adapt the brain to commit crimes.

With the impetus given to him by the HCU by considering what was done badly as well done, the Dean of Social Sciences once again proceeded in an irregular manner.

HCU resolutions 132/2022 and 400/2013 establish a procedure for appointing an interim director of a degree program. The first states that “the director of the degree program will be succeeded by the longest-serving tenured professor in the corresponding Academic Unit.” The second states that after verifying the seniority, the outgoing interim director must consult with the next director to determine whether he or she agrees to take up the position.

In compliance with this procedure, Professor Arturo Saravia was consulted to take on the interim position. He accepted immediately. On August 16, he asked the dean for the “fifth time” to proceed in accordance with the rules. But the dean and his vice-dean, Fidel Rojas, blocked the appointment de facto because Saravia is not part of their cabal. What is more, they gave a “soft blow” (in MAS terms) to the Directorate when the vice-dean practically acted as director and supervised the formation of the electoral committee for the election of a full director.

When I finished writing this short report, a professor informed me that the UMSA legal department had already issued a positive statement regarding Saravia’s nomination. But I don’t know if it declared null and void all the actions that had been carried out by authorities who had probably usurped functions.

Yes, a transparent university is possible. But slogans are not enough, but actions are. One of them is to put an end to the cliques because they turn to the right or the left, as it suits them. They can organize a dinner to finance the campaign of a candidate for rector and then change sides to stay in the same place.

These groups believe that autonomy is for covering up irregularities. A woman who is part of one of these groups complained to a teacher for having sought out María Galindo to report the abuses committed against her. “You cannot take things out,” she told her.

Corruption does not like the public eye, but UMSA is obliged to expose itself to public scrutiny because it operates with public money.

Regarding this case, I sent a note to the UMSA Transparency Department on July 17, but to date there has been no response. I was embarrassed to call the lady in charge of communications because I no longer knew what excuse to give myself. A response is of no use at this point, the UMSA Internal Audit Department has already confirmed the irregularities.

“Do you know of any corruption? Report it! (…) We have reopened the Transparency Unit (…). Don’t keep quiet because a transparent university is possible,” the Rector invites in a video. Listen to her, report it!