Two of these projects, which are part of the international research initiative Horizon Europe, were launched around the time the Committee on Human Rights / Conflict Zones issued its advice to the Executive Board last spring. The third project is more recent, with its official start date not until 2027.
This collaboration, Inter-organelle crosstalk in viral infections, involves the company 1Base Pharmaceuticals, which, according to the project website, is based in Naale, an illegal settlement in the occupied West Bank. Unlike the other participating institutions, 1Base Pharmaceuticals is not shown on the map on the project page, where it previously had been.
The three projects have not yet been assessed against the new policy on collaborations with Israeli institutions (see text box), according to university spokesperson Mischa van Vlier.
SENSITIVE COLLABORATIONS
‘Two of the projects – one of which is aimed at improving treatment for cancer patients, and the other at preventing infectious diseases such as tuberculosis – were already running before the advice from the Committee on Human Rights was submitted to the Executive Board, and before the Board announced the new policy. Since it has been agreed that existing collaborations will be reassessed, these projects will also be re-evaluated.’
According to Van Vlier, the collaboration for the VirION project ‘has not yet started and is currently awaiting assessment by the LUMC working group responsible for evaluating sensitive collaborations with external partners’. The timeframe for this assessment is still unclear.
‘This working group advises LUMC’s Board of Directors’, says Van Vlier. ‘The guiding principle for this assessment will be that no new institutional collaborations will be entered into by LUMC.’
NO RENEWAL
In its previously outlined policy, the Executive Board takes a clear stance on the occupied territories, namely ‘to complete the current contractual term and not to re-enter into commitments upon renewal or in response to new calls’. And: ‘Where the actual relationship with the Israeli partner is minimal or is conducted through a third party, a more administrative termination may suffice, but the fundamental decision not to renew must be explicitly documented.’
1Base Pharmaceuticals has no online presence and is registered as ‘liquidated’ with the Israeli equivalent of the Chamber of Commerce. However, the company’s address in the commercial register does match the address on the project page. Through the website of a charity, Mare was able to identify the name of the company’s presumed CEO. This researcher works at the University of Southampton, which also participates in the Horizon project. He has declined to answer Mare’s questions. The Portuguese coordinator of the Horizon project did not respond to questions.
In addition to Leiden University, Amsterdam UMC is also involved in the collaborative project with 1Base.
In its report, the Committee on Human Rights / Conflict Zones identified four considerations regarding collaborations with Israeli institutions: strengthening the economic and institutional infrastructure of Israeli partners, institutional recognition and legitimisation of these partners, material and immaterial support to institutions that are brought into connection with human rights violations, and the risk that Leiden staff help perpetuate a system that leads to violations of human rights and international humanitarian law.
Based on this, the committee recommended this spring that ongoing collaborations be suspended or terminated and that no new institutional research collaborations with partners in Israel be entered into until further notice.
‘Continuing collaborations with these partners in the current context would be at odds with the university’s core values: such forms of (indirect) involvement normalise practices that are incompatible with these values’, the committee stated.
However, the Executive Board added a few additional comments: ‘Without wishing to detract from the moral core outlined by the Committee, additional considerations come into play that lead us to adopt a more nuanced approach.’
For instance, the Executive Board takes the nature of the activity into account in its assessment of the collaboration. The moral issues outlined by the committee must be weighed against the potential positive benefits of the research, for example in biomedical projects that could save lives.
The Executive Board also takes into account whether withdrawing from projects could damage the university’s reputation.
‘For patient organisations, professional groups in the medical sector and international consortium partners, unilateral withdrawal from ongoing collaborations can raise questions about the reliability and consistency of the university as a partner.’
Based on these considerations, amongst others, the university decides whether a collaboration with an Israeli institution can proceed.
In the near future, a more clearly defined policy on collaborations is expected to be introduced – the so-called Integrated Approach to Responsible Collaboration – but this policy is still being developed.