The purpose of this Policy is to establish institutional principles ensuring that scientific research, education, instruction, publication, academic debate, and knowledge-sharing activities at the Turkish-Japanese Science and Technology University are conducted in accordance with the principle of academic freedom. The Policy regulates the scope of academic freedom, the responsibilities to be observed in exercising this freedom, its legal and ethical boundaries, the methods for evaluating claims of academic freedom violations, and the obligations of relevant individuals and units of the University.

TJU recognizes academic freedom not as a personal privilege granted to academic staff, but as one of the fundamental conditions for the University to effectively fulfill its duties in education, research, and service to society. Scientific progress depends on researchers’ ability to ask questions, test established views through scientific methods, debate different approaches, and share their findings in accordance with the law and scientific ethical rules.

This Policy aims to create a balanced framework between academic freedom and scientific responsibility, institutional accountability, research ethics, public interest, individual rights, and the rule of law. Academic freedom cannot be interpreted as a domain of unlimited and irresponsible action, nor can it be unnecessarily and disproportionately restricted on the grounds of administrative order, institutional reputation, or avoidance of criticism.

This Policy is applied within the framework of the Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye, the Higher Education Law No. 2547, the Law on the Establishment of the Turkish-Japanese Science and Technology University No. 7034, the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Türkiye and the Government of Japan regarding the establishment of TJU, and other legislation in force in the field of higher education.

In the application of this Policy, provisions regarding the freedom of science and arts, freedom of expression, scientific autonomy, equality, protection of personal data, intellectual and industrial property rights, research ethics, obligations of public officials, occupational health and safety, national security, public order, and criminal law are jointly observed.

This Policy does not supersede applicable laws, international agreements, Presidential decrees, Council of Higher Education regulations, or other binding legislative provisions. In case of a conflict between the provisions of this Policy and higher norms, the higher norms will apply. However, the University exercises the discretionary margin left to it by the legislation in the direction of the broadest possible principles of academic freedom, scientific merit, proportionality, and procedural guarantees.

This Policy covers full-time, part-time, contracted, assigned, and visiting academic staff, researchers, postdoctoral researchers, research assistants, lecturers, students, project personnel, academic administrators, and other individuals participating in scientific activities at the University.

The Policy applies to TJU-affiliated academic activities conducted on the University's campuses, research centers, laboratories, field studies, online learning environments, international joint programs, in Japan, and other countries. Research, publication, classes, seminars, conferences, consulting, and science communication activities targeting the public, conducted on behalf of the University or utilizing University resources, are also evaluated within this scope.

Companies, public institutions, research organizations, foundations, sponsors, and international partners collaborating with the University are obligated to respect the basic principles stated in this Policy regarding academic activities carried out within TJU. Provisions protecting academic freedom, the right to scientific publication, and research integrity will be included in contracts and protocols to be made.

Academic freedom is the freedom of the members of the academic community to conduct activities of researching, analyzing, questioning, producing, teaching, learning, discussing, explaining, criticizing, and publishing scientific knowledge in accordance with the law, the scientific method, and ethical principles.

Scientific autonomy refers to the ability of the University and academic units to make their scientific and academic decisions based on scientific merit and academic criteria, within the limits of current legislation and authority. Scientific autonomy does not mean the University is exempt from legal oversight or public accountability.

Institutional academic autonomy is the University’s ability to determine its academic programs, research priorities, curriculum, quality standards, and academic evaluation mechanisms through its own scientific organs to the extent permitted by legislation.

Academic responsibility refers to the exercise of academic freedom in conjunction with the principles of scientific integrity, truthfulness, professional care, respect for individual rights, transparency, accountability, and legal compliance. The academic community encompasses academic staff, researchers, students, and other individuals directly participating in the scientific and educational activities of the University.

In the exercise of academic freedom at TJU, the principles of scientific merit, pluralism, critical thinking, research integrity, openness, equality, mutual respect, transparency, and accountability are foundational. The fact that a view is not a customary, widespread, popular, or institutionally endorsed one does not in itself constitute grounds for excluding that view from the academic environment.

Academic decisions are based on scientific quality, professional competence, academic performance, and objective criteria rather than personal closeness, political conviction, nationality, culture, religion, language, gender, disability status, or differences in academic opinion. The University administration and academic units create an environment within the academic community where different scientific approaches can be debated safely and respectfully.

Academic freedom does not mean any individual is exempt from scientific criticism or academic evaluation. Scientific claims can be criticized in terms of evidence, method, consistency, and research ethics. However, scientific criticism cannot be turned into a tool for personal attacks, insult, threat, discrimination, intimidation, or deliberate damage to professional reputation.

The University does not obstruct research, publication, speeches, or academic activities that comply with the law and academic standards merely because they are found controversial, critical, or uncomfortable. Nevertheless, it takes necessary and proportional measures when there is a concrete legal, ethical, security, or individual rights risk.

Academic staff and researchers can determine research questions and study topics in line with their areas of expertise, scientific curiosity, and societal needs. The fact that research topics differ from the University's current strategic priorities does not in itself constitute grounds for obstructing the research or negatively evaluating the researcher.

It is possible for the University to prioritize certain strategic research areas and allocate additional resources to these areas. However, the determination of strategic priorities cannot be implemented in a way that bans other scientific fields or systematically excludes scientifically valid research on administrative grounds.

Researchers construct their research questions and hypotheses based on scientific grounds. University administrators, sponsors, donors, public institutions, or private companies cannot demand that research results be predetermined, that certain findings be concealed, or that scientific results be altered in line with their expectations.

Resource allocation, ethical approval, laboratory capacity, legislative compliance, and security requirements can be evaluated in terms of the feasibility of the research. These evaluations cannot be used as a means to control the scientific outcome of the research or the viewpoint the researcher is expected to reach.

Researchers have the freedom to select scientific methods, theoretical approaches, data collection tools, analysis techniques, and experimental designs appropriate for their research goals. Method selection is under the researcher's scientific responsibility in accordance with the accepted scientific standards of the field, research ethics, security, and validity criteria.

Ethics committees, scientific research project commissions, and laboratory safety units cannot act with the aim of controlling the scientific viewpoint or ideological orientation of the research. The evaluations of these structures are strictly limited to their legal and institutional areas of responsibility.

Research involving human participants, animal experiments, personal data, hazardous materials, high-risk devices, biosecurity, environmental risks, or similar elements cannot commence without obtaining the necessary ethical, administrative, and legal permissions. The obligation to obtain permission is not the elimination of academic freedom, but the guarantee that research is conducted responsibly and lawfully.

Researchers' access to the University's laboratories, libraries, databases, equipment, and research infrastructure is arranged based on objective, transparent, and academic grounds. In resource allocation, the researcher's personal views or criticisms directed at the administration cannot be decisive.

When prioritization is required in shared research infrastructure, the scientific quality of the project, security requirements, project schedule, external funding obligations, student education, and equipment capacity are taken into account. The justifications for allocation decisions are recorded and communicated to the relevant researcher upon request.

Researchers are obligated to use the resources allocated to them in a manner that is suited to their purpose, efficient, and safe. Academic freedom does not permit the use of University resources for personal, commercial, or off-project purposes.

Academic staff and researchers have the right to publish, present, and publicly share the results of their scientific research through appropriate academic channels. The fact that a research outcome does not align with the expectations of a sponsor, administrator, public institution, or other stakeholder is not sufficient grounds for blocking the publication.

In projects financed by the University or external stakeholders, pre-publication review can only be conducted for the purposes of removing confidential information, protecting personal data, preparing intellectual property applications, checking contractual obligations, and identifying clear legal risks. This review cannot be used to alter scientific results, conceal negative findings, or indefinitely delay publication.

If it is necessary to temporarily postpone publication for the protection of intellectual property rights, the postponement period must be justified, limited, and proportionate. As a rule, the review and protection process is completed within sixty days. In obligatory cases for the preparation of patent or similar applications, this period may be extended up to a maximum of ninety days with a reasoned decision. Longer restrictions can only be applied if there is an explicit legislative provision or a special contractual obligation accepted by the researcher.

Researchers have the freedom to select the journal, publishing house, or conference they will work with. However, the research ethics and quality standards set by the University must be adhered to concerning predatory publishing, fake conferences, unethical publishing models, and non-scientific venues.

TJU encourages research results to be made open, accessible, and reusable, reserving legal, ethical, and contractual limitations. The sharing of scientific publications, research data, software, and other outputs via appropriate open access mechanisms is supported.

The principle of open science does not require the uncontrolled disclosure of personal data, trade secrets, information classified as state secrets, patentable inventions, confidential information belonging to third parties, or data that is problematic for security reasons. Researchers strike an appropriate balance between openness and confidentiality obligations in accordance with legislation.

In cases where research data is not shared, the scientific, legal, ethical, or contractual justification for this decision is recorded. Limitations on data access cannot be applied arbitrarily.

Academic staff have the freedom to determine the content, teaching method, resources, case studies, and forms of academic discussion for their courses within the framework of the approved program and course learning outcomes. Updating course content according to current scientific developments and presenting different academic approaches to students is encouraged.

Freedom of teaching does not grant the authority to act completely outside the curriculum, course description, learning outcomes, and measurement-evaluation principles accepted by the University Senate and relevant academic boards. The academic staff member exercises their academic freedom alongside program integrity and educational responsibility towards the students.

Controversial topics can be covered in classes. The academic staff member may express their own scientific view; however, they cannot impose their personal view as unquestionable fact. Students are allowed to express differing opinions in a scientific and respectful manner.

Classes cannot be used as tools for political propaganda, commercial promotion, personal benefit, or ideological pressure on students. The systematic imposition of topics irrelevant to the scientific content of the course is not considered within the scope of teaching freedom.

Academic staff may determine exams, projects, assignments, laboratory work, presentations, and other evaluation methods, provided they align with the course learning outcomes. Evaluation criteria are clearly communicated to students at the beginning of the course and applied consistently to all students.

Students' grades are determined based on announced academic criteria, not on whether they agree with the academic staff member’s views. A student's defense of a different view on scientific grounds, asking critical questions, or disagreeing with the academic staff member’s approach cannot be grounds for negative grading.

An academic staff member's academic evaluation cannot be arbitrarily altered by administrative authorities unless there is a claim of concrete error, miscalculation, violation of announced criteria, discrimination, or irregularity. Students' rights to appeal grades are protected under the relevant education and examination regulations.

Students have the right to ask questions in classes, debate scientific views, offer evidence-based criticism, develop research topics, and reach conclusions different from the views of academic staff. This right does not grant authority to disrupt the order of the class, obstruct others' right to learn, insult, threaten, or engage in discriminatory behavior.

Students cannot be subjected to discrimination in academic evaluations because of their own political, cultural, religious, or personal views. Students' views can only be evaluated in terms of the course topic, level of academic justification, and compliance with scientific standards.

Graduate students participate in academic decision-making processes alongside their advisors in developing thesis and research topics. Advisors cannot force students to compulsorily adopt their own personal views or scientific approaches. However, the advisor bears the responsibility of providing academic guidance regarding the scientific quality, feasibility, ethical compliance, and program proficiencies of the work. Students cannot be subjected to retaliation due to good-faith academic criticism, ethical issue reporting, or applications regarding irregularities.

Thesis advisors, research group leaders, and principal investigators use their academic authority to support the scientific development of young researchers. Research assistants, doctoral students, and postdoctoral researchers have the right to express scientific views, propose methods, and discuss research results in proportion to their contributions.

The advisory relationship should be built on scientific guidance, regular feedback, mutual respect, and clear task definitions. It is unacceptable for the labor of students and young researchers to be made invisible, for them to be denied the authorship they deserve, to be employed in personal tasks, or to be pressured over their academic futures.

Disagreements within a research group are resolved through scientific discussion, written division of tasks, and mediation as much as possible. Necessary institutional guarantees are provided to ensure that the academic progression of individuals who have disagreements with their advisor or project leader is not arbitrarily obstructed.

Members of the academic community have the right to criticize scientific theories, methods, research results, University policies, and the higher education system. Criticism is a natural part of scientific and institutional development.

Good-faith and lawful criticism directed at University administration, academic units, or institutional policies cannot be the grounds for suspension, funding cuts, denial of teaching duties, obstruction of academic promotion, negative impact on project applications, or similar retaliations.

For criticism to be considered within the scope of academic freedom, it does not necessarily have to align with the institution’s views. However, criticism must not disclose personal data, confidential documents, investigation details, trade secrets, and other legally protected information.

The right to criticism does not protect behaviors of insult, slander, threat, discrimination, harassment, targeting, inciting violence, or consciously producing false information.

Academic staff and researchers may express views on topics related to their fields of expertise through the press, scientific meetings, social media, and other public platforms. The University encourages academics to share scientific knowledge with society and offer evidence-based contributions to public debates.

Academic personnel clearly distinguish between their personal views and the University’s official stance. No one other than the Rectorate or authorized units can claim to make official statements on behalf of the University. Mentioning an academic title and affiliation with TJU does not automatically mean the statement becomes the University's corporate view.

If the context does not clearly indicate that the statement is a personal view, an appropriate explanatory phrase is included. The University's name, logo, official communication channels, and corporate documents cannot be used without authorization.

A lawful and good-faith scientific statement by academic personnel cannot be the subject of disciplinary or administrative sanctions merely because it causes public debate, draws backlash from individuals or organizations outside the institution, or misaligns with the University administration's approach.

The University's official views are determined only by authorized boards or administrators and are announced through authorized communication channels. Individual academic views of University members cannot be considered TJU's official view unless there is explicit authorization.

The University administration also cannot present individual statements of academic personnel as corporate statements unless the content or context of the statement explicitly indicates otherwise. This distinction protects both the University's corporate responsibility and the individual academic freedom of academics.

If an academic staff member holds an administrative position, it is stated as clearly as possible whether the statement they make is an academic view or an administrative statement.

Scientific diversity and pluralism are foundational in the organization of conferences, seminars, panels, workshops, and similar academic events at the University. The fact that a speaker or topic is controversial is not in itself sufficient grounds for blocking the event.

Event applications are evaluated based on predetermined objective criteria such as hall capacity, security, academic purpose, budget, program suitability, and technical capabilities.

TJU’s special cooperation model between Türkiye and Japan is implemented in a way that strengthens the University’s principles of academic freedom and scientific autonomy. Turkish and Japanese academics participate in scientific activities with equal academic respect and opportunities for expression.

Public institutions, universities, companies, and other partners from both countries cannot predetermine the outcomes of research or education at TJU. In joint programs, decisions on course content, research methods, and publications are made based on scientific and academic criteria.

Legal, cultural, and institutional differences in Türkiye and Japan are handled with mutual understanding. However, since TJU is a state university operating in Türkiye, the legislation of the Republic of Türkiye and the decisions of the University's authorized organs are essential in transactions within the University.

Japanese academics and other foreign academic staff benefit from the same principles of academic freedom and responsibility as Turkish academics to the extent permitted by legislation. Nationality, language, or institutional background cannot be grounds for discrimination in the academic right to speak or in scientific evaluations.

In international research partnerships, academic freedom, publication rights, data ownership, intellectual property, confidentiality, and researchers' contributions must be clearly regulated in contracts.

Different practices in the country where the international partner is located do not eliminate the responsibilities of TJU researchers arising from the legislation of the Republic of Türkiye and University policies. When the legislation of more than one country must be applied in joint research, the opinion of the legal unit and relevant expert committees is sought.

The termination of international partnerships or the changing of political, economic, or diplomatic conditions is managed in accordance with the principle of protecting the academic rights of continuing students and researchers as much as possible.

Industry collaborations, donations, and external funds can support the University's research capacity; however, they cannot improperly direct the research agenda, findings, or academic evaluations.

Sponsors do not have the right to predetermine research outcomes, prevent the disclosure of unwanted results, alter scientific data, or control the academic views of researchers.

In sponsored research contracts, the researcher's publication rights, data usage, intellectual property, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and conditions for early termination of research are clearly stipulated. Contractual clauses that eliminate academic freedom indefinitely or completely block the publication of negative results are not accepted.

Donation or sponsorship support does not provide privileges over academic staff appointments, student admissions, grading, thesis outcomes, or scientific evaluations. Donations related to the naming of University units or academic positions also do not grant academic decision-making authority.

Academic freedom and the protection of intellectual and industrial property rights are jointly observed. Researchers have the right to demand that the true contributors to their works and inventions be accurately identified.

Inventions, software, designs, databases, and other intellectual products developed within the University are managed in accordance with current legislation, contracts, and TJU's intellectual property policy.

Intellectual property processes cannot be used as a means to unnecessarily block scientific publication. It is essential that the researcher can continue scientific publication after the temporary confidentiality period required for patent protection or commercialization has expired. Authorship and inventorship are determined based on actual scientific and creative contribution rather than academic title or administrative position.

Academic freedom does not protect research ethics violations. Data fabrication, misleading alteration of data, plagiarism, unfair authorship, excluding contributors, duplicate publication, salami slicing, disclosing confidential peer review information, and misusing research resources cannot be considered within the scope of academic freedom.

Researchers are obligated to record data accurately, securely, and traceably; honestly explain their methods; not conceal negative or unexpected results; and initiate correction or retraction processes when an error is detected.

Research ethics reviews cannot be used to penalize differences in scientific opinion. Ethical violations must be distinguished from scientific errors, methodological debates, or differences in interpretation. Intent, negligence, field standards, and the context of the research are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Ethical reviews are conducted in accordance with principles of confidentiality, impartiality, the right to defense, avoidance of conflicts of interest, and reasoned decision-making.

Academic freedom does not permit the violation of personal data, privacy, or the rights of research participants. In research involving personal data, legal processing conditions, disclosure, cases requiring explicit consent, data minimization, security, retention, and disposal principles are observed.

Research participants are protected in line with the principles of volunteerism, informed consent, withdrawal from research, and non-maleficence. Extra protection measures are taken especially in studies conducted with children, disabled individuals, patients, students, employees, and individuals in a dependent position to the researcher.

In cases where academic staff include their own students as research participants, it is ensured that no pressure is formed over grades, course success, or academic relationships.

Authority to access confidential data or documents does not mean this information can be disclosed limitlessly under the guise of academic freedom.

Research conducted in fields such as defense, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, energy, critical infrastructure, unmanned systems, and similar areas may entail special responsibilities both in terms of scientific progress and public security.

In dual-use or misuse-risk research, risk assessment, access control, data security, export or technology transfer limitations, and necessary permission processes are implemented. These processes are not used to control the scientific viewpoint of the research, but to manage concrete security and legal risks.

The restriction of research on security grounds is only based on concrete, explainable, and proportionate reasons. General, vague, or hypothetical security statements are not accepted as sufficient for indefinitely blocking academic work.

Academic appointment, promotion, term extension, and performance evaluation processes are based on scientific merit, teaching quality, research outputs, ethical compliance, institutional contribution, and the requirements of the relevant position.

A candidate's lawful academic views, research topic, good-faith criticism of institutional policies, or approach in scientific debates cannot, on their own, be reasons for negative evaluation.

Evaluations take into account the publication, citation, project, and work production formats of different scientific fields. Evaluations that reduce scientific quality merely to the number of publications are avoided.

Jury and commission members are obligated to declare conflicts of interest. Evaluation results are based on objective criteria and justification. Candidates' rights of objection and judicial recourse recognized in the relevant legislation are reserved.

The Rector, vice rectors, deans, institute directors, department heads, center directors, and other academic administrators use their administrative authorities in a manner that protects academic freedom.

Administrators cannot issue directives aimed at determining the scientific views of academic staff or students, altering research results, or preventing lawful criticism. Administrative powers cannot be used as a means of pressure in resolving personal disagreements.

Arbitrary differences in course load, laboratory access, project opportunities, office allocation, assignments, or academic evaluations cannot be created due to disagreements between an administrator and an academic. Administrators observe the principles of confidentiality, impartiality, proportionality, and protection from retaliation in disputes related to academic freedom.

The development of TJU as a research-oriented and international university depends on the creation of a secure academic environment where scientific thought can be freely produced and debated. Academic freedom is a fundamental institutional value directly affecting the University's scientific quality, innovation capacity, and international credibility.

The protection of this freedom is a shared responsibility not only of the University administration but of all members of the academic community. While academic staff and researchers fulfill their obligations of scientific integrity, professional care, and respect for individual rights, administrators must use their powers in a way that protects academic pluralism, merit, and critical thinking.

TJU aims to develop a balanced institutional model among academic freedom, scientific autonomy, accountability, and research ethics, in accordance with the legal and higher education framework of the Republic of Türkiye. This model, which brings together the academic accumulation of Türkiye and Japan, is based on a university culture where different scientific views are freely debated, research results are honestly published, and academic decisions are made on the basis of merit.