'The panel would want to be confident that what they were doing was fair and that Professor Brooke was not unduly advantaged'
The don appointed to Oxford University's prestigious new chair in science and
religion was a member of the official panel set up to fill the post.
John Brooke, currently professor of the history of science at Lancaster University, has been announced as Oxford's new Andreas Idreos professor of science and
religion and will take up the post next month, with a fellowship at Harris
Manchester College.
Professor Brooke was appointed by Oxford's vice-chancellor as one of nine members of the electoral board set up in October 1998 to draw up the shortlist of applicants and conduct the interviews for the post.
A spokeswoman for Oxford University confirmed that he was a member of the electoral board. She said that Professor Brooke had resigned from the board in accordance with Oxford's published procedures when he put himself forward for the job.
The procedures allow "electors" to stand for the post they have been responsible for filling as long as they resign from the electoral board and stand for the post before the published closing date for applications. They can get round this requirement and apply for the post after the closing date, "if they are invited to do so by other electors", the spokeswoman said.
Oxford was unable to confirm how deeply Professor Brooke had been involved in shortlisting and interviewing for the post before he decided to stand for it, or whether he had played any role in dismissing rival candidates.
"I'm not sure how far they had got by the stage he withdrew. Their deliberations and the stages they go through are all confidential," the spokeswoman said. She did confirm, however, that he resigned from the board in May this year - seven months after it was set up and just over a month before his appointment was announced.
"Clearly the other members of the panel would want to be confident that what they were doing was fair and that he was not in any way unduly advantaged," she said. "They interviewed six people besides
Professor Brooke. It was a wide field."
Professor Brooke said he could not discuss his role in shortlisting and eliminating other candidates. "It was never in my mind that there could have been any unfairness," he said. But he accepted that procedures that allow electors to play a part in the decision-making process and then stand for the post themselves will inevitably lead to problems with perceptions of fairness.