How Historians Got Involved in Memory Politics: Patterns of the Historiography of the Polish People’s Republic before and after 1989

Memory politics in contemporary Poland has often been described as a limitation to historians’ freedom of research. Against this backdrop, this article explores how historians of the Polish People’s Republic (PRL) have been contributing to memory politics in the context of the democratic transition. It argues that the dissidence of the 1980s has paved the way to the post-1989 historiographical renewal, by favoring the development of an anti-communist historiography that ultimately facilitated the advent of the historical policy ( polityka historyczna) of the 2000s. After 1989, the Polish historiography of the PRL was extensively reshaped on the basis of the dissident historiography of the 1980s. The main protagonists of the 1990s were largely drawn from the ranks of dissent, and many of them saw their scholarship as an extension of their past anti-communist engagement. Additionally, political changes turned the legacy of the old regime into a central issue of post-communist politics. History was called upon as a policy tool at the service of the democratic transition, whether it involved criminalizing the communist regime or maintaining the collective memory of the dictatorship. This conception of history resulted in the creation of the Institute of National Remembrance (IPN) at the end of the 1990s, but also in the affirmation of a historical policy justified by the need to redress the wrongs of the memory politics conducted in communist Poland. Contemporary history in the post-1989 years was thus far from free of politicization, even if it took different forms.

The Italian Way for Research Biobanks After GDPR: Hybrid Normative Solutions to Balance the Protection of Individuals and Freedom of Research

The Italian context of biobanking is made up of a vast number of collections, in some cases well-organised and connected in virtuous networks and in others not identifiable as structured biobanks. From a comparative perspective, Italy can be regarded as a hybrid model, positioned between countries with full and detailed legislation concerning biobanks and those that rely only on guidelines published by national ethics committees or professional societies that have no binding legal value. In countries like Italy where the need for specific regulation is more urgent, the entry into force of the GDPR could have offered a chance to fill the gap in the legislation with regard to biobanking for medical scientific research purposes. This overview highlights the improvements made and the obstacles that persist.

Libertad de investigación e impunidad de dictadura: jurisprudencia constitucional a la deriva = Freedom of Research and Impunity of Dictatorship: Constitutional Jurisprudence Adrift

Resumen: Este trabajo parte de la evidencia de la impunidad de los crímenes de la dictadura franquista por obra, esencialmente, de un aparato judicial que ha bloqueado el acceso de las víctimas y de sus descendientes a la justicia. Se concentra en la responsabilidad que pueda recaer en el Tribunal Constitucional como instancia de amparo de derechos. Su papel ha sido clave para recluir el asunto de la criminalidad franquista en la historia para extraerlo del derecho. Confrontado con Comunidades Autónomas que emprenden con decisión la vía contraria, como sea el caso de Navarra, la cobertura de la impunidad está llevando al Tribunal Constitucional a extremos de degradación de sus procedimientos con riesgo de deslegitimación de su jurisprudencia.Palabras clave: Impunidad franquista, derechos de investigación e información, derecho al honor, derecho a la verdad y a la justicia, Tribunal Constitucional, crítica de jurisprudencia.Abstract: This paper’s starting point is the evidence of impunity for the crimes of the Francoist dictatorship, essentially due to a judicial regime that has blocked the access of victims and their descendants to justice. It focuses on the responsibility that may fall on the Constitutional Court in its capacity as protector of rights, since it aims at confining the question of Francoist criminality in the field of history to extract it out of the realm of law. Some regional governments, such as Navarre, resolutely take the opposite path, against which the coverage of impunity by the Constitutional Court leads to extremes of degradation of its proceedings bearing the risk of delegitimisation of its jurisprudence. Keywords: Francoist impunity, research and information rights, right to honour, right to truth and justice, Constitutional Court, criticism of jurisprudence.

Interessekonflikter i forskning: Om forskningens saksorienterte forpliktelse

Researchers are increasingly challenged to adjust to interests defined outside their own disciplinary boundaries. This follows from more or less explicit expectations to seek interdisciplinary collaboration and partnership within the private and public sectors. How can researchers identify and handle conflicts of interest in this situation? To answer this question, we first defend the validity of the traditional ideal of disinterested research. This ideal still provides a key guideline for identifying conflicts of interest in research: the freedom of research. This freedom should not, however, be misunderstood as disciplinary confinement or as freedom to ignore societal interests. We suggest that the crucial issue is the freedom and duty to be oriented towards the subject matter itself.

Freedom of Research Area

Some writers have said that academic freedom should extend to giving academics complete freedom over what they choose to research. I argue against this: it is consistent with academic freedom for universities to hire people to research particular subjects, and to make continued employment conditional on at least some of the academic’s research being in the areas they were hired to work in. In practice, many academics think that their fellow academics should be free to choose to work on anything that’s within the disciplinary boundaries of the department they were hired into. I argue that’s both too narrow and too broad. Academic freedom implies that researchers should be allowed to have their research focus drift over time. But the boundaries of permissible drift do not correspond to anything like the boundaries of contemporary academic departments.