Growing Concerns About Political Freedom at the UvA
By Roshni Ravi | News | April 08, 2025
Cover Illustration: University of Amsterdam by Amstel River, May 13, 2022. Teresita Biafore / Unsplash
A recent confrontation between security guards and representatives of the Activistenpartij at UvA’s Medicine campus (AMC) has sparked renewed concerns over political freedom at the university. The incident comes amid broader debates on student activism, free expression, and the university’s proposed revisions to its house rules. Roshni Ravi reports.
On February 13, 2024, a confrontation between representatives of the Activistenpartij and the security guards at the University of Amsterdam’s Medicine campus (AMC) called into question the foundations of democracy at the university. The Activistenpartij was invited to the AMC to represent their interests as a leftist student political party in the UvA Student Councils. Their stand had flyers displaying information for prospective members about the Activistenpartij, their goals and their role in the student councils. The representatives were confronted at their table in the central hall by two security guards who informed them that the Communications Department did not agree with their flyer.
This incident ties into a larger debate over the state of political freedom at the university, which was ignited by the student pro-Palestine protests in 2024 and the revised house rules that have been proposed by the Executive Board (CvB) in their aftermath. Students and faculty members involved in democratic processes at the university share their thoughts.
The Activistenpartij’s Concerns
The Activistenpartij currently holds six out of 14 seats in the Central Student Council (CSR), whose mission is to democratize, decolonize and decarbonize the university. Hidde Heijnis, 24, is a history student at the UvA and the chair of the Activistenpartij.
Speaking on the incident at AMC, Hidde explains that the security guards asked to see their permit for flyering within the campus. “Representatives from the Student Council of Medicine explained that they had a permit, at which point the security guards shifted tactics and said that the permit needed to have given permission for these specific flyers.”
The current house rules of the UvA state that the distribution of oral or written information with a cultural, political and/or religious purpose is not permitted, with certain exceptions or if permission has been obtained beforehand.
“We asked them if we were allowed to stand there without the flyers or the table, and just speak to students,” Hidde continues. “To this, they also replied that we did not have their permission.” In Hidde’s view, this “clearly showed that they just wanted us out of the building and that the flyer was only an excuse to get us out.”
In light of this incident, the Activistenpartij lodged a complaint with the dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Dr. Yvo Roos. In his reply, Dr. Roos denies that there was an issue with the content of the flyers, and claims that the Activistenpartij had been handing out the flyers in the central squares of the hospital rather than the J-square, where the faculty is located, thus disturbing patients and visitors to the hospital. The Activistenpartij states that this story is fabricated and that they never visited the central squares or handed out flyers there.
Outdated House Rules
Members of the CSR and the Central Works Council (COR) address broader concerns about democracy at the university in the wake of this confrontation. Much of these regard UvA’s house rules, which “are basically rules of behaviour at the UvA,” Stefana, a 25-year-old master’s student in European Union Law, and chair of the CSR, explains.
In their statement regarding the need for new house rules to replace “outdated and inconsistent” ones, the CvB places importance upon creating a “pleasant and socially safe study and work environment” for the students and staff of the UvA. The CvB states that while demonstrations are allowed, the right to demonstrate is not unlimited and cases of “violence, hatred or discrimination” will not be permitted.
The CSR is a co-determination council, representing the interests of students at the UvA by advising the CvB. Stefana believes that the need for new house rules to mediate interactions between the students and the university became apparent at the beginning of 2024 with the CvB’s responses to sit-ins and protests against the genocide in Gaza. “In these rules, they had a line which said that no political, cultural or religious expression was allowed at the UvA. It was very vague and they used that rule to suppress a lot of events and close down the campus.” In essence, many are viewing this rule as a restriction on the right to protest.
Stefana alludes to instances where educational events organized about Palestine were stopped through bureaucratic means. “It really did feel like the university was prioritizing something other than academic discourse.” It was after this that the CSR from the previous year notified the CvB about the insufficiency of the old house rules, on account of their arbitrariness. At the time, Stefana called it an “investment for the future.”
Updated House Rules
In conjunction with the CSR, the COR also works to advise the CvB on policy-making issues. The COR is made up of 15 elected staff members who speak with the CvB on a monthly basis. Njal van Woerden is a member of the COR and he teaches philosophy of science at the Institute for Interdisciplinary Science (IIS).
Njal explains that the COR had already been involved in talks of revising the outdated house rules in early stages. “At that time, we were going into the Gaza conflict,” he says. “We agreed that it wouldn’t be a good idea to develop the new house rules from the perspective of the current crisis, because then you get a reflection of the crisis in your house rules.”
Njal continues: “We agreed that the house rules should have a positive note in that they should reiterate what academic values and responsibilities are about, rather than just placing restrictions.” When a draft of the new house rules was published in December 2024, however, these concerns were not addressed adequately.
“We’ve notified the CvB that we can’t agree with the current version of the house rules,” Njal says. “We also feel bypassed that this document is being brought into the broader public even though we have a lot of issues with it.”
Stefana states that the CSR disagreed with the draft house rules that they were sent the previous academic year, which have now been revised. She states that according to legal advice commissioned by the CSR, provisions concerning occupations, blockades and overnight stays were “illegal according to national and international law.”
Concerns and Contention
Stefana describes the effect created by the proposed rules as a “chilling effect” in legal terms. “By instituting a set of rules, the effect will be that people would not want to go to a protest because they know they are going to be filmed, surveilled and their identity will be taken out. People will be fearful of their status as a student at the university despite the fact that they should also be able to exercise their freedom of assembly.” Stefana goes on about the disproportionate threat of this to vulnerable people: people of color, people from minorities and international students who don’t have an EU passport.
Njal shares the COR’s perspective on this restriction of the right to protest: “We’re a Dutch university which falls under Dutch law, but we’re also a university that reflects current perspectives in research and culture. We’re also a university in Amsterdam, which situates us in a more activist context.”
Njal also empathizes with the perspective of the CvB in this matter, referring to the atmosphere of fear and distrust created on both sides during the May protests of 2024. “The fear doesn’t help in such situations because then you don’t listen to each other. I can understand that some people wear masks because they don’t want to be identified but still, within the open culture of the university, it shouldn’t be necessary to wear masks. I do think that we should have this basic trust within our organization and that trust was under a lot of pressure during the last demonstrations.”
Political Freedom
Stefana expresses frustration with the way the CSR’s concerns have been taken up by the members of the UvA administration. “There is still a paternalistic attitude towards students even if we know what we are doing,” she says. “Very big, explosive events had to happen for us to be listened to … There was a severe problem of communication and feeling like we were not taken seriously last year. We solved some of those issues with the CvB with mediation. But I still think that we have a long way to go regarding issues with the administration of the UvA.”
“It’s a bit scary that the university is not on the side of the students,” says Stefana. She believes it’s important for the UvA to be a “political university”. “The university should be a place where people are able to develop politically,” she says. “We are doing this exercise to be citizens. If we cannot start exercising these rights in the environments we are in, then it’s going to be harder for us later on to develop any civic sense or duty.”
Roshni Ravi is a university student in Amsterdam. The views expressed here are not necessarily those of The Amsterdammer.
