{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011842105263157895, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.009216589861751, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Missing in action: Exposing the moral failures of universities that desert researchers facing court-ordered disclosure of confidential information

Abstract A cardinal rule of academic research with human participants is to protect their confidentiality. While there are limits to confidentiality, universities and researchers will make strenuous efforts to protect the identity of participants. This is especially important where they are at risk of serious harm if confidentiality is breached. Yet, some researchers doing highly sensitive research have found themselves subject to encroachment by law enforcement who seek access to the data collected by them in order to build evidence for legal purposes. University regulations require scholars to conduct research ethically in accordance with specific conditions and extensive review processes set by bodies such as Institutional Review Boards or Human Ethics Committees following extensive application processes. If academic staff fulfill these conditions, what obligations do universities have to protect researchers, participants and confidential data? It seems that universities have limited legal liability to protect researchers when incriminating data has been collected. Presenting examples of recent cases such as Boston College’s ‘Belfast Project’, the paper argues that universities have a stringent ethical obligation to protect academic researchers and an obligation to proscribe forced disclosures of confidential research data to enforcement agencies.