Executive Board does not distance itself from sharing five names with police, citing lack of evidence

‘TU Delft shares names of students and staff with police; Amnesty responds critically’, Delta revealed on 11 February. The article detailed how, in 2024, the Integral Safety Department had passed on the names of one employee and four students to the police. The reason? They were believed to be potentially involved in an announced peaceful demonstration. Amnesty International described this as unlawful surveillance, which could lead to criminalisation and a chilling effect.

In an article a week later, the Dutch Data Protection Authority (AP) requested clarification. “Personal data can only be shared if there is a basis for doing so. If there is a basis, the university must be able to explain it. It must also be able to demonstrate that there were no other ways that would have been less of an infringement of fundamental rights,” said a spokesperson in general terms.

Untraceable

However, the third statement (see box for the earlier statements) from the Executive Board (CvB) on this matter, published on the intranet on 17 April, indicates that the clarification requested by the AP regarding why the names were shared will not be forthcoming. “We have since concluded that we cannot determine this. This is because we did not record matters properly, meaning this can no longer be ascertained.”

Although the Executive Board has now hired an external agency to conduct an investigation, this conclusion already follows from its own internal inquiry. “We have been unable to find any documents on the matter,” a spokesperson told Delta.

General apologies

In the 17 April statement, the Executive Board apologises to the four TU students whose details were passed on to the police. Lecturer and former Delta columnist Bob van Vliet had already received an apology. “The Executive Board explicitly stated at the time that writing critical columns should not be a reason to share personal data and offered an apology for this. The apology we offered to all those involved last week relates, in a general sense, to the sharing of names wtth he police,” the Executive Board replied to questions from Delta.

‘The Board implicitly leaves open the possibility that sharing names may have been justified after all. That is damaging’

Although students do not have access to the intranet, the apology reached two of the four students involved. They had, in fact, contacted TU Delft themselves to ask whether their personal data had been passed on to the police. “After a general response from the university confirming that it was indeed me, I was asked if I would like a personal meeting with one of the Executive Board members,” says former TU student Michael (this is a pseudonym; his real name is known to the editors, Ed.) That meeting will take place on 30 May.

More is needed

Although the two students are positive about the apology, they feel this is only a start. Michael: “More is needed. Students’ safety and right to protest should really be protected, especially now that the right to protest in the Netherlands is being increasingly restricted.”

The other affected student, Deniz (pseudonym; his real name is known to the editors, Ed.), would have preferred the Executive Board to have clearly distanced itself from the sharing of personal data of its own students and staff with the police. “And to have said: we want to protect their rights.”

Van Vliet is also critical of the new statement. “They do not condemn the passing on of their own students’ data and instead implicitly leave open the possibility that it might have been justified after all. I find that damaging, because this affects the entire TU community. I have spoken to students and staff who say they are less inclined to demonstrate because of the data sharing. To build collective trust, they should have said: this should never have happened.”

External investigation launched

In March, the Executive Board announced that it would commission an external agency to investigate the agreement with the police on the basis of which the demonstrators’ data was shared. That external party appears to have started work in the meantime, but the Executive Board does not wish to reveal who it is ‘in the interests of the investigation’. A spokesperson has stated that this will only be disclosed once the investigation has been completed, which should be before the summer.

In early March, the Executive Board had already stated that the sharing of personal data with the police could still take place in the future, but only ‘following an explicit decision by the Executive Board’. Student Deniz criticises this approach. “The sharing of demonstrators’ data should not take place under any circumstances, not even following an official decision.”

Widespread criticism

The matter came to light following a Freedom of Information request submitted by journalist Samuel Arrascaeta. In addition to Amnesty International and the Dutch Data Protection Authority, the Works and Students Councils, the Delft branches of GroenLinks and the PvdA, the Dutch Association of Journalists and the Higher Education Media Association were among those who criticised the way the matter had been handled.

In collaboration with Saskia Bonger.