TU Delft rejects lecture because of ‘political connotations’. Students miss guidelines

On 21 February, GreenTU Board Member Nefeli (who prefers her surname not to be used) received an unexpected email saying that her reservation for a space in the Pulse academic building was rejected. GreenTU, the green office at TU Delft and a part of the University Services, wanted to hold a presentation with the Ugandan climate activist Nicholas Omunuk. He was to have discussed how the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) influenced communities in his country and how hard it is to hold companies responsible for human rights violations.

But TU Delft refused to reserve the space. Two reasons were given in the rejection email: the application was submitted too late, and the presentation was political. The email does not explain what is considered ‘political’.

When questioning this, a staff member at Education & Student Affairs (ESA) referred Nefeli to information on the intranet that has since been removed. It stated that reservations for ‘political and religious events’ in general academic buildings such as Pulse are rejected as a matter of course (see screenshot, in Dutch).

Conflict avoidance

To have the lecture go ahead, GreenTU turned to the Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences (CEG). It seems that the Faculty has different rules. “You do not need to explain why you want to reserve a room. You ask the service counter for a room and if one is available, you get it without further questioning,” says Nefeli.

She does question things though. If holding political and religious events in the general academic buildings is not permitted, why could previous meetings such as the debate about Gaza and Democracy Day both be held in Pulse?  “It looks like TU Delft is trying to avoid discussions instead of offering the space for critical discussions,” says Nefeli. She is concerned about the way in which TU Delft handles these types of requests.

Conflicting information

A TU Delft spokesperson explains that GreenTU’s reservation was only rejected because it came too late (it was submitted three weekdays in advance instead of the required two weeks) and not because of the subject. “Unfortunately we must conclude that the right information was not given to the applicant.” It also transpired that the information – a list of conditions that included that reservations with a religious and/or political subject are not permitted – on the intranet is not correct. “This has now been removed from the intranet page.”

‘Where can we talk about these kinds of subjects?’

The spokesperson says that it is a misunderstanding that TU Delft tries to avoid debates. “We see it as our job to facilitate open debates in a safe and respectful way. We will always try to find ways to give space to different views.”

Discussion about Palestine

It is not known how many reservations were rejected on the basis of this ‘inaccurate’ information on the intranet. Two other students reported similar experiences to Delta.

They received blunt answers from the Echo academic building when they wanted to reserve a space for a discussion about Palestine with the deans of all the faculties in September. Delta saw the email which stated that the event ‘did not meet the requirements for general academic buildings’. Further explanation was not given. The group turned to the boardroom of the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management which was reserved by the former Dean, Aukje Hassoldt, herself.

Viewed as political

Ibn Firnas, the Muslim student association, received a similar message in February last year. Weeks after a lecture in Echo about the history of Palestine, a staff member of the TU Delft Student Community Team wrote that the event was viewed as political and that ‘these kinds of events would no longer be possible in the general academic buildings’. 

A board member of the association (name known to the editor) called that classification ‘unjustified’ and spoke of arbitrariness. ‘We received that unfounded designation only a few weeks after the event. In the run-up to it, we had good contact with all involved. We were even wished success.’

‘Freedom of expression is essential, but it does not mean that all meetings can be held automatically’

Ibn Firnas believes that the unclear TU Delft policy is leading to ‘constrictions on academic debate’. The association says that it does not hold any political activities either on or outside the campus. What the students do want is to be able to talk about current societal subjects such as the political climate in the Netherlands, the Middle East, or the rule of law. But Ibn Firnas sees little space for this. “Where can we talk about these kinds of subjects? Can we do so on campus or do we have to go elsewhere?” asks a Board Member.

New approach and advisory team

The TU Delft spokesperson says that the above mentioned cases show ‘the need for a clearer assessment framework’. To make it easier to assess events and demonstrations, TU Delft established an Advisory Team on 18 February. The spokesperson says that it is made up of experts on security, integrity, communications, and legal issues. It assesses applications in line with a ‘moral assessment framework’ or ‘mini-moral deliberation’. Factors that are taken into consideration include ‘security, reputation and academic freedom’. The TU Delft Code of Conduct is also a consideration.

The spokesperson repeats that events with political or religious connotations are not automatically refused, but that every application is assessed individually. “Freedom of expression is essential, but it does not mean that all meetings can be held automatically if there are other factors that weigh heavily.”

Transparency

The students involved wonder how the new system will work in practice. They argue for transparency about the decision-making process and clear guidelines about what kind of events are or are not permitted. “It seems random and unpredictable at the moment,” one of them says.

The TU Delft spokesperson says that the Advisory Team is the first step. “How it will work will be further developed over time so that we can give greater clarity in the decision-making process and the guidelines.”

Neither the information page on the intranet nor the form on the self-service portal where you submit a request currently give any explanation about the Advisory Team or the assessment criteria for room reservations. What is stated is how to reserve a room, when this is not possible (such as during exam periods), the minimal number of attendees (30), and that an application must be submitted at least two weeks in advance.