The term “academic freedom” has only been included in Dutch law since 1986, says Peter Kwikkers. “Before that, it was a principle. Or at most an unwritten rule.” And in 1992 it nearly disappeared from the law again.

At the time, Kwikkers was working as a civil servant at the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science (OCW). Education legislation needed to be modernized; the Higher Education and Scientific Research Act (WHW) was on the way. Kwikkers became the project leader.

The CDA political party asked why academic freedom was no longer included. “We simply thought it wasn’t necessary and wanted to make the law more concise,” Kwikkers recalls. “But that was actually impossible to explain. So we ended up putting it back in. Also for universities of applied sciences.”

In other words, mainly to avoid the hassle. Not because the minister at the time, Kwikkers himself, or his colleagues were particularly worried about academic freedom. But the world has changed since then.

Books banned

Kwikkers: “What’s happening in the United States is extremely worrying. Authorities are interfering with access to education, imposing financial penalties and even banning books. That shows how easily academic freedom can be crushed.”

For that reason, he believes academic freedom also needs stronger protection in the Netherlands. On his own initiative, he began writing a book: Prospects for academic freedom – a conceptual right. It has just come off the press.

In it, Kwikkers outlines the history of the concept of academic freedom as well as the views on it held by various actors in politics, education and academia. He also puts forward concrete proposals for embedding academic freedom in legislation. “Because you can lose that freedom quickly.”

Don’t define it too narrowly

Broadly speaking, academic freedom means that you are free to conduct research and teach according to your own judgment. You can follow your curiosity. The accompanying responsibility is that you remain open to criticism of your methods and findings.

At the same time, Kwikkers argues that academic freedom should not be defined too narrowly—precisely to protect it. His idea: the more strictly you define that freedom, the less it ultimately covers.

What you can do, however, is explain how it differs from other freedoms. According to Kwikkers, academic freedom should not be confused with freedom of expression or the freedom to demonstrate (because an opinion or political stance does not necessarily have an academic foundation). Institutional autonomy and scientific integrity are also not identical to academic freedom, although they are closely related.

Kwikkers: “From a legal perspective, it is an individual right, a protection for students, researchers and lecturers. But it is a protection that ultimately benefits society as a whole.”

In his view, academic freedom is by definition limited. You cannot always choose your own study path or study pace, and in most cases you cannot completely determine the topic of your PhD research either. And there are many more examples, says Kwikkers: “Within a department, you jointly determine the research program, but you should realize that this does limit individual academic freedom.”

Oath

So how do you protect a freedom that is constantly under pressure? One option, Kwikkers suggests, is an oath taken when graduating or completing a PhD. In his book he already proposes one: “I, student/teacher/researcher, will safeguard, respect and defend everyone’s academic freedom and uphold the quality of education and science…” followed by additional commitments.

Of course, people can break their oath, just as doctors can break the Hippocratic Oath. But an oath helps set the tone, Kwikkers believes. “You shouldn’t only consider how to prevent violations of academic freedom through legal provisions, but also how to ensure that the value of this freedom is truly understood by everyone.”

Press freedom

For that reason, he also believes press freedom within universities and universities of applied sciences should be legally guaranteed. In the past he found it somewhat embarrassing to suggest such a thing—surely any self-respecting administrator would want an independent publication within their institution?—but after several incidents involving censorship and intimidation, he has changed his mind.

“It’s time to throw out that lifeline, if only because an independent in-house publication can—and must—help safeguard academic freedom and strengthen it where necessary,” his book states. Smaller institutions could even maintain a joint publication if needed, but there must be one.

After all, such news outlets are essential for open debate within an institution. They also enable journalists to hold administrators accountable if they restrict academic freedom.

Legal provisions

Kwikkers has drafted a range of possible new legal provisions. Not only the Higher Education and Scientific Research Act (WHW), but also the Dutch Constitution could benefit from amendments, he believes. Article 7 on freedom of expression, for instance, should gain a new first paragraph: “Thoughts and feelings are free. Education and the practice of the arts and sciences are free. Academic freedom is inalienable.”

The new government speaks frequently about freedom in its coalition agreement, but academic freedom is not mentioned. Nevertheless, it is likely to become a topic of discussion during this government term.

The previous government was already concerned about this freedom. The Minister of Education asked the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) for advice: is academic freedom currently sufficiently protected under Dutch law?

According to Kwikkers, the answer is no. And sometimes the issue lies in relatively small details. At the moment, academic freedom has disappeared from the law (“due to a blunder”) for the National Library of the Netherlands, the KNAW, and privately funded universities of applied sciences and universities. That must certainly be corrected, Kwikkers believes.

But whatever the KNAW advises, he does not think it will make his book redundant. “It is not only intended for politicians and legal experts. It is for everyone who deals with this freedom. For example, you should also protect academic freedom in the education and examination regulations and when developing participation structures.”

Peter Kwikkers, Prospects for academic freedom – a conceptual right. Publisher: TriasNet. Price: 42 euros, including shipping.

This article was translated using AI-assisted tools and reviewed by an editor.