8、2021年12月14日更新:質疑方針對倫敦行政法庭第二次裁決提出新的訴求:(1)行政法庭ICO於11月26日作出裁決:LSE沒有菜論文口試人員名單和口試報告;(2)LSE法務主管半年前向中華民國法務部發文,提供了兩位菜論文口試委員名單作為法庭證據,台法務部根據這個LSE信件向台灣菜論文質疑者發出通緝令。根據ICO第二次裁決,LSE法務主管半年前提供的口試人員名單可能是無中生有(the school cannot provide what it does not have)。請求青天大老爺判明LSE究竟有還是沒有。。。
9、2021年19日更新:2021年12月18日倫敦行政法庭裁決中,法官否定了倫敦大學有關1984年菜論文在圖書館丟失或擺錯書架的說法,因為圖書館根本就沒有該論文的入館檔案和微縮膠片。 “The appellant says that the absence of the original thesis from any of the libraries, as required by the University’s rules, indicates that there was no thesis at the time. Having viewed the emails from the libraries and the video from Dr. Peng, it does appear that none of the libraries have a record of the thesis being provided at the time the PhD was awarded in 1984. We accept that the explanation provided by the University that the thesis had been lost or mis-shelved may not be correct, as there is no catalogue or microfilm record of the original thesis.”