Harvard University president Claudine Gay who began 2024 with fresh accusations of plagiarism against her has resigned.

The fresh complaint was submitted by an unidentified whistleblower who included never-before-seen samples of her work to support the claims.

The Washington Free Beacon reported that the accuser claimed that in one of Ms Gay’s 2001 journal articles, she had taken sentences from David Canon’s book, “Race, Redistricting, and Representation: The Unintended Consequences of Black Majority Districts,” without properly attributing the quotes or using quotation marks.

Mr Canon’s name, though absent near the lifted sentences, was listed in the article’s bibliography.

Mr Canon, however, let Ms Gay off the hook after he told The Washington Free Beacon the lifting of passages from his book could not be considered plagiarism in any way.

“I am not at all concerned about the passages,” Mr Canon told the newspaper. “This isn’t even close to an example of academic plagiarism.”

The institution feels that the complaint could not be taken seriously since the person who filed it chose to hide their identity.

The complainant justified their choice to remain anonymous to protect themselves from “retaliation” by Ms Gay and Harvard, which he said were both seriously colluding to cover up the allegations.

Harvard Corporation Board reviewed the contentious works last year and found “few instances of inadequate citation” but said they were not sufficient grounds for “research misconduct.” 

The institution deliberately refrained from using the word plagiarism in its statement.

“President Gay is proactively requesting four corrections in two articles to insert citations and quotation marks that were omitted from the original publications,” Harvard wrote in a statement absolving its president of any wrongdoing last December.

But the review excludes the new set of plagiarism allegations raised and submitted to Stacey Springs, Harvard‘s research integrity officer, on New Year’s Day. 

The fact that the independent review was concluded within a few weeks of its launch has raised concerns about its thoroughness. The complainant asserted that such reviews usually take six to 12 months to complete.

“The board’s review of Gay’s work was too brief to inspire confidence,” the whistleblower stressed. “We now know for certain that the board’s investigation was a sham.”

The accusations were further compounded by an anonymous student’s opinion piece, which echoed the views of other students and accused Harvard University of applying double standards whereby undergraduates found to have committed the same offence were subject to stiff sanctions like suspension while Ms Gay, as president, got preferential treatment.

“Omitting quotation marks, citing sources incompletely, or not citing sources at all constitutes plagiarism according to Harvard’s definitions,” read the piece headlined “I Vote on Plagiarism Cases at Harvard College. Gay’s Getting off Easy.” 

The student, expecting the institution to hold Ms Gay to the same standard, if not higher, called for her resignation.