In September, the General Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD) and the National Coordinator for Security and Counterterrorism (NCTV) published a report classifying the GNSV as far-right. The security services also warned that universities were normalising the association by allowing it to participate in university activities.
The GNSV has had a stall at the information market during El Cid in recent years. This led to protests, and the participation body called on the Executive Board to ban the association. Leiden’s municipal council would also like to see the university exclude the organisation.
The Executive Board is unwilling to exclude the association as of yet, arguing that there are no legal grounds for doing so. The Board did, however, promise to consider revising the guidelines for participation in the market.
Following the security services’ recent report, Radboud University Nijmegen decided to ban the GNSV from its activities with immediate effect. Leiden is not following suit.
DECISION-MAKING
On Monday, during the University Council meeting, Tolga Güneri of staff party FNV asked whether the report by the AIVD and the NCTV had ‘had an impact’ on the decision-making process regarding the GNSV. ‘Especially since Radboud subsequently decided to ban the association’, said Güneri. ‘Surely the report was a hint, hint, nudge, nudge to university boards.’
‘We are reviewing the guidelines for participation in the information market’, responded Rector Sarah de Rijcke. The report also plays a role in this. ‘We are expediting our assessment of the risks identified by the security services.’
However, the Executive Board wants to look beyond just participation in the information market. ‘We have asked the Student and Educational Affairs department to investigate the rules and procedures governing organisations and associations. What requirements must they meet to be allowed to use university facilities?’
De Rijcke promised that any revisions and new rules would be implemented well before the next El Cid.
Güneri asked why Leiden is acting more slowly than Nijmegen. ‘Why are they not hesitant about banning the GNSV?’ De Rijcke: ‘The situation is more complex there, but let’s not talk about Radboud. We’ll limit ourselves to Leiden.’ Vice President of the Executive Board Timo Kos added: ‘What’s reported in the media is not the same as Radboud’s decision-making process.’
When asked, a spokesperson for Radboud University confirms to Mare that the report was indeed the reason why the GNSV will be banned from now on.
TAKING A STANCE
Gerrit Schaafsma of staff party LAG wanted the Executive Board to take a firm stance against the association: ‘Does the Executive Board, in principle, intend to refuse organisations such as GNSV? Can we get a clear answer to that?’ De Rijcke: ‘That statement will have to wait a little longer.’
Kos: ‘We understand the intention very well. However, if you make such a statement without the necessary grounds, you may end up undermining your own decision. Of course, we reject discrimination and exclusion. We have already made that clear on several occasions during Council meetings. But the question for us as the Executive Board is: can we find grounds for banning associations that would also stand up in court? If we can’t, it will blow up in our face.’
‘I believe that, as a university, you cannot be a neutral platform’, concluded De Rijcke. ‘There need to be clear rules and guidelines that the university must adhere to. Defining what you stand for as an organisation can be maddeningly bureaucratic sometimes, and that is very frustrating. But it is necessary to achieve a long-term impact.’