Radboud University wants to manage future demonstrations and gatherings on campus. But how? Following strong criticism during the previous Joint Assembly meeting cycle, the Executive Board presented its new plans last Monday. But the participational bodies still had questions about the proposed measures.

Demonstrations on campus must meet the conditions set by the Nijmegen municipality. Face-covering clothing is not permitted, buildings may not be occupied, and other activities such as exams or ceremonies may not be disrupted. The University also asks to be notified of demonstrations in advance. These are some of the new guidelines regarding demonstrations on campus that were discussed at the Joint Assembly (GV), the University’s central consultative body, on Monday.

‘The intention is that these documents ensure that all demonstrations and meetings that take place on campus run as smoothly and safely as possible,’ Vice President Agnes Muskens emphasised at the start of the discussion.

Toned-down plans

The plans have been toned down compared to a previous document prepared by the University. That document was supposed to be discussed at the previous Joint Assembly, but following criticism from the participational bodies, it was taken off the agenda at the last minute. For example, the current plans no longer state that demonstrations require prior permission from the director of Campus & Facilities. Internal regulations, academic meetings and demonstrations are also being treated as separate units.

But the new plans still led to questions from the participational bodies at last Monday’s Joint Assembly meeting. Indeed, it soon emerged that the plans were not merely being submitted for approval, but could still be modified. For instance, there is a lot of switching between the ‘rules’, ‘guidelines’, ‘tools’ and ‘conditions’ imposed on organising a demonstration. ‘But’, as Works Council member Mathijs van de Sande immediately quipped, ‘there is a discrepancy between these terms’. What exactly are we talking about, he wondered.

‘We have a responsibility for the entire campus’

‘So let’s make it guidelines, for the sake of clarity,’ replied President of the Executive Board Daniël Wigboldus, for whom this was the last Joint Assembly. According to Wigboldus, the guidelines are not random. ‘A lot of it is based on the previous guidelines of the Universities of the Netherlands and other existing legislation’.

The request to give a 48-hour notice of demonstrations is mainly a practical consideration, according to Vice President Muskens. ‘That way we can make sure everything is well organised in time. This is in everyone’s interest, for the safety of students, staff, attendees, and speakers. We have a responsibility for the entire campus. And so that, if necessary, the municipality can provide us with advice or support.’

Unexpected escalation

If a demonstration does ‘unexpectedly escalate’, one of the documents says, the institution’s management will consult with the local triangle (the Mayor, police and the public prosecutor) to see what the best approach is to bring the action to an end. A potential criminal prosecution is also a possibility. In the spring, the occupation of the Erasmus building and Thomas van Aquinostraat 1 were ended through police intervention. Substantial damage was done during the occupation of TvA 1; the building had to be closed for several days to allow for repair and cleaning work.

‘It depends on the severity of the offence. It’s about proportionality’

The internal regulations are not optional, according to the guidelines. Students who do not comply with the rules can receive a written warning or be temporarily or permanently denied access to part of the campus and some of their classes. In the worst case scenario, the University may even decide to permanently terminate the student’s enrolment. In addition to warnings and terminations, employees can expect ‘legal measures’, in line with the collective agreement. Visitors may be banned from the campus grounds.

But how strictly should that be interpreted, Works Council member Elco Nab wanted to know at the Joint Assembly. ‘It depends on the severity of the offence,’ Wigboldus reassured him. ‘Throwing rubbish on the ground can obviously be resolved with a good conversation. It’s about proportionality.’

A customised approach, in other words, with each case being considered individually. Followed by the conclusion that the documents could do with quite a bit more discussion. The revised plans will be on the agenda for the next Joint Assembly.