Over the past few days, the Climate Justice Committee (CJC) has been demonstrating in Velp. Staff and students have been briefly informed each time about the current situation. We fully understand that, also due to the publications in the press, this raises questions among all our students, staff, professional field partners and alumni.

Over the past three years, CJC has demonstrated at our university of applied sciences on several occasions. We believe it is important that – especially at a university of applied sciences like ours, where major societal transitions are central – there is space for every opinion to be heard. That is why we allow this voice, even when it makes it more difficult for us to present a balanced perspective.

CJC consists of several students from our university of applied sciences (Velp campus). We share their concerns about the rapid pace of climate change. It is not without reason that climate change is one of the four transitions central to our university. This includes both learning how to live with it and how to prevent further change.

The portrayal given in external media and by CJC therefore affects us all the more. Unfortunately, this past Wednesday, police intervention was required because CJC students intended – and continued to intend – to stay overnight. This is where we draw the line. CJC's actions also provoke many counter-reactions, creating a risk of escalation, which we unfortunately experienced first-hand two years ago.

It is very important to us that such actions can take place without the involvement of the police. Fortunately, in the past two years, this has often been the case. This past Wednesday, we gave CJC ample space for their demonstration. The demand presented on Wednesday in a letter was to establish a working group within VHL made up of students and staff, which would address how climate justice should be incorporated into every study programme’s curriculum, with changes to be implemented by 2026. On Wednesday, discussions were held with CJC to explore reasonable ways to respond to this. However, they only wished to engage in open dialogue with the Executive Board in the auditorium. CJC was thoroughly informed by the manager of Education & Research on how students can influence curricula. This can be done through Programme Committees, which exist for all degree programmes and consist of representatives from both students and staff. CJC was invited to join these. It was also promised that the Executive Board would be open to holding a public dialogue in the auditorium on Thursday (as the Executive Board was not present in Velp on Wednesday). Nevertheless, CJC continued to state that they would not end their occupation unless their demands were met.

CJC was asked several times on Wednesday to leave the building before closing time. This request was not followed. After consultation with the local 'triangle' – consisting of the mayor, police and public prosecutor, who are involved in decisions around police deployment in the case of demonstrations – it was decided that police would be called in after closing time if CJC did not leave. At 19:30, half an hour after closing time, management again requested, in the presence of five police officers, that the group leave voluntarily. The group of around 15 students and one lecturer indicated they would not comply. The police then took over and clearly stated that the 'occupation' would indeed be ended. The group was given another chance to leave voluntarily and informed that arrest would follow if they refused. Five students stated they wanted to be arrested; the others left voluntarily. Even after being taken into custody, these students refused to cooperate and were carried outside by two police officers each. No weapons, dogs or other equipment were used; the students chose to lie down on the floor. We deeply regret that it has since emerged that one of the students sustained some abrasions. Naturally, this affects us.

CJC continued their demonstration in the auditorium on Thursday. At the request of the Land and Water Management programme, due to previously scheduled activities, CJC relocated their demonstration. On Friday, the auditorium was unavailable because of the annual Business Fair. CJC was offered a stand at the fair, which they accepted and occupied. On both Thursday and Friday, CJC left the premises before closing time.

Over the past few years, many conversations have taken place and efforts have been made to find common ground. There have been several direct discussions with the Executive Board. Sessions have been organised, including an open dialogue session and two Studium Generale events on the topic of climate justice. CJC was involved in both the content and organisation of all these sessions, and applied researchers, management representatives, directors, and in some cases the Executive Board were also present. CJC has had the opportunity to regularly organise their ‘Climate Café’ initiative within our university. Multiple discussions have been held with the Executive Board, and an external board member was brought in to act as a mediator for dialogue.

We experience this as a – not always easy – search for balance: on the one hand offering space to students with strong convictions, and on the other hand ensuring that staff and students can carry out their work in physical and social safety. To guide this properly, there are rules in place for demonstrations that we all must adhere to.

We would very much like to find a way to engage constructively with one another to contribute to the shared goal we are all committed to. However, we also conclude that, because communication so far has only involved demands and disruption, we have not yet found that way. We remain committed to finding a balance – in line with our role as a knowledge institution – between providing space and ensuring safety, with respect for one another’s views and room for differing opinions.

Executive Board and Management
Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences