S.L. 327.665 Art. 9Arbitration Mechanism

(1) Arbitration may be sought by the Doctoral Candidate, either whilst within the doctoral passage or possibly as an outcome of the Examiner Panel conclusions following viva evaluation of the dissertation manuscript. The arbitration is an internal doctoral progress mechanism that aims as resolving and reconciling and does not impede the candidate from escalating a case to the MCAST Grievance Office or externally to the Office of the Ombudsman or to other legal recourses.

(2) In event of arbitration sought by the Doctoral Candidate during the course of progress in the doctoral journey due to a significant dispute between the Candidate and the supervisory team, the Candidate is requested to formally communicate this dispute to the Doctoral Degree Committee. The DDC shall attempt to mediate the issue and to find an amicable solution. If no solution is found the Candidate may opt to request a change in supervisory team, being clearly cognizant of the implications and possibly difficulties that could be encountered when replacing one or both supervisors. The Candidate shall bear joint responsibility for this decision, and with full awareness of its implications.

(3) In event of arbitration sought by the Doctoral Candidate due to a significant disagreement with the outcome and final evaluation of the Examiner Panel following the doctoral viva, the Candidate is requested to formally communicate this dispute to the Doctoral Degree Committee. The DDC will establish an Advisory Committee, consisting of no less than three (3) members and no more than five (5) members, to provide it with a guided opinion on the validity of the Candidate’s claim. This Committee shall include one member from the MCAST Board of Governors, another member from senior academic management and a third member from senior academic standing. In the event that the Advisory Committee deems the claim to be unsubstantiated or erroneous, the DDC shall sanction the earlier conclusion of the Examiner Panel. In the event that the Advisory Committee deem the claim to be substantiated, the DCC shall opt to reconvene a new viva session with an entirely new viva team.

(4) In the possibility that one or both members feel that their position as supervisor to the particular Candidate is untenable for any reason, the member/s may request to the Doctoral Degree Committee to permanently remove them from the supervisory team. The DDC shall seek due reason for conceding to this request, and if in agreement, take action to replace one or both supervisors with minimal possible disruption to the progress of the Candidate.