A campaign for ethical international partnerships at Uppsala University
Uppsala University currently lacks a central policy or designated body for assessing the ethical dimensions of its formal agreements with international partners. Assessments are made at departmental level, where staff are rarely equipped to evaluate human-rights or international-law implications.
This creates legal and reputational risks for the University: the risk of entering into or maintaining collaborations with institutions implicated in serious and/or systemic violations of human rights and/or international law.
To ensure Uppsala University's international partnerships reflect its ethical commitments, the University Board would form an inclusive committee, composed of experts in research ethics and international law, as well as representatives from all different levels of responsibility at the University, tasked with:
PEAT concerns only formal institutional agreements, not collaborations between individual researchers. It applies to agreements signed by department heads or higher-level university representatives.
PEAT focuses on violations of Jus Cogens: the strongest, most fundamental norms of international law, which admit of no derogation:
"Aggressive war" refers to the United Nations Charter prohibition on the use of force. "Racial discrimination & apartheid" is condemned in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Complicity is determined by the expert committee on a case-by-case basis, since it depends on a partner's ties to or independence from political bodies driving the violations above.
PEAT is grounded in a strong commitment to academic freedom. A core element of that freedom is the institutional independence of universities from political authority. By emphasizing collegial governance, transparency, and faculty self-determination in decisions concerning international partnerships, PEAT reinforces this independence. It shifts decision-making authority away from external political actors and back to the university's own collegial bodies, where academic expertise is present.
At the same time, PEAT recognizes that academic freedom coexists with the need for ethical accountability. Like any system of ethical review, it must balance the protection of scholarly autonomy with the responsibility to avoid complicity in harmful practices. Accordingly, PEAT envisions the suspension or termination of institutional agreements only in exceptional circumstances — specifically, where a careful and independent evaluation finds that a partner institution is implicated in egregious and sustained violations of international law or human rights, including genocide, crimes against humanity, apartheid, or serious breaches of international humanitarian law.
"Ethics" can mean many things. PEAT defines ethical review primarily as the upholding of fundamental human rights and international law, especially in egregious violations. This means an ethical review by the relevant committee will only target those most extreme cases, such as where collaboration partners contribute to crimes against humanity. Where exactly the line is drawn will be evaluated by the expert committee, case by case.
The concept of "responsible internationalisation" shares a common starting point with PEAT: the recognition that Swedish universities lack adequate frameworks for the ethical review of international partnerships. However, "responsible internationalisation" risks allowing governmental foreign policy priorities to influence decision-making about international academic cooperation. By contrast, PEAT explicitly aims to insulate ethical decisions from political pressure by grounding them in predefined, autonomously-established ethical standards, rooted in international and humanitarian legal frameworks.
Several European universities (Ghent University, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), and Tilburg University) already use similar systems to ensure their partnerships are ethical, transparent, and protected from accusations of political bias.
Objective: The Committee ensures that ULB's institutional collaborations, particularly international ones, comply with international law, fundamental rights, and academic freedom. It acts as an advisory body to the university authorities, especially the Rector and/or the Academic Council.
Scope: The Committee issues recommendations on institutional agreements/partnerships that engage the responsibility of the University (contractual relationships signed by the Rector or by delegated signatories), including agreements with public or private, academic or non-academic partners. Individual collaborations covered by academic freedom (publications, conference participation, research stays, inviting/hosting researchers) are not included. The Committee only evaluates the institutional partner, not the country/state. The Committee does not compete with other internal university structures focused on ethics — if needed, it forwards requests outside its scope to the relevant bodies.
Composition: Permanent members include the Vice-Rector for External Relations and Cooperation, Director of the International Relations Service, Vice-Rector for Research, Vice-Rector for Education, and Director of the Student Mobility Service, plus 2 experts in international law and fundamental rights and 2 experts focused on Dual Use. Members are renewed every two years, and mandates are renewable. Consultation with external experts can be proposed by any permanent member; these experts are advisory only and have no voting rights.
Referral: Researchers, academics, project leaders, and relevant administrative advisors can refer matters to the Committee, as can authorities and members of the Academic Council.
Recommendations: The Committee adopts recommendations with a two-thirds majority. Members may issue a minority opinion if they disagree, which will be included with the recommendation. Absent members do not vote but may still express an opinion. Recommendations are non-binding and submitted to the Academic Council, which decides within its competence. Research agreements are referred, as usual, to the Rector for decision. Faculties or academics affected by a recommendation may express their views before the Committee makes a decision, or after the recommendation is issued to the Academic Council or the Rector. The Committee meets as needed.
Call on Uppsala University to adopt a Policy of Ethical Academic Ties
Sign this petition if you would like to see a policy for ethical academic ties at Uppsala University, ensuring its international partnerships uphold academic integrity, international law, and human rights.
Sign the petition
If your organisation would like to endorse this campaign, please reach out at policyonethicalties.uu@gmail.com
Join the campaign or start one at your institution
PEAT is a grassroots campaign run by staff and students. Whether you want to help organise at Uppsala, start a sister campaign elsewhere, or simply have questions: we would love to hear from you.
The best way to reach the PEAT campaign team for all enquiries.
Alexandre Raffoul, Affiliated researcher, Department of Peace and Conflict Research, Uppsala University
Silvana Hultsch, PhD candidate, Department of Philosophy, Uppsala University
If you have expertise in international law, research ethics, or university governance and would like to contribute to the development of the PEAT framework, we are especially keen to hear from you.
How PEAT came to be, where we are, and where we are going
PEAT emerges in informal discussions between colleagues and students who are unsatisfied with the University's ad hoc and inconsistent responses to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the genocidal violence of Israel in Gaza.
First presentation of the idea of campaigning for an independent review mechanism at Uppsala University, at an event with several student organisations.
Meeting with senior colleagues who had expressed similar dissatisfaction with the lack of a principled review mechanism. Presentation of the first draft of the PEAT proposal and discussion of how PEAT can be implemented at Uppsala University.
Submission of the refined PEAT proposal to the University Board.
Launch of the PEAT campaign: petition and website go live.
We are working on spreading the word about the petition to everyone — staff and students at Uppsala University and the general public — who would like to see an ethical review mechanism of international partnerships at Uppsala University. We have regular co-working sessions during the spring term at Engelska Parken. Reach out if you would like to join!
Uppsala University has no central policy for evaluating the human rights and international law implications of its institutional partnerships. We are calling on the University Board to change that.
Add your name to the petition and help us build the case for ethical academic ties at Uppsala University.
✍ Sign the PetitionUppsala University currently lacks a central framework for evaluating the ethical dimensions of its formal international partnerships. PEAT would change that.
Focused on violations of Jus Cogens: the strongest norms of international law, including crimes against humanity and genocide.
Applies only to formal agreements signed at department level or above, not to individual research collaborations or conference participation.
A representative committee assesses partnerships against pre-defined ethical standards, not shifting political pressures.