The safety of everyone on campus is paramount. That’s why the university is working closely with the police to create a safe environment. Currently there are no clear signals indicating disruptions that would pose a risk to staff and students. We are extra alert and will take immediate action should these signals change.

This doesn’t change the fact that the possibility of a protest can also create an unsafe feeling. We’re committed to supporting everyone affected by recent events. The following resources are available:

In case of an emergency
In the event of an immediate physical threat or emergency, call security.

020 525 2222
This number is not intended for general, non-urgent questions about safety.

Staff

• Do you have questions or concerns? Are you experiencing problems in your work? You can discuss this with your supervisor.
• Are you in distress? Please contact staff welfare services or Slachtofferhulp Nederland (victim support services outside the UvA).
• You can always contact a confidential adviser.
• Do you want to file a complaint about police brutality? You can find more information on the police website.

Students

There are different people you can approach, such as a study adviser, a student psychologist or a confidential adviser. Read more on the student site.

Discussions

Discussions have been organised at various places within the UvA providing an opportunity to talk about recent events. Further discussions can be organised if needed.

If the events surrounding the protest affect your study progress, please contact a study adviser.

For lecturers looking for tips on how to get a conversation going about the impact of the demonstrations, the Teaching & Learning Centre offers tools and support.

Demonstrating is allowed and there is always room for protests at the UvA, but without face coverings, blockades, overnight stays or an atmosphere of intimidation.

The UvA's commitment is always to ensure that the protest is peaceful. We try to maintain a dialogue with demonstrating students and staff. But house rules also apply. No face coverings, no overnight stays. We don't want an atmosphere of intimidation on campus, nor any vandalism. If that’s not possible or these house rules are broken, we ask demonstrators to leave. In case of disruptions, threats or signs of them, the police are informed. At this point it is only communication between organisations. In principle nothing happens, when informing. The police sometimes visit to assess the situation for themselves.

On their website, the police say the following: ‘The police accompany demonstrations at the request of the mayor to ensure safety for demonstrators and the surrounding area. De-escalation is the focus of any actions.’ And: ‘The police act when offences are committed, agreements made are not kept or the health of demonstrators or bystanders is at risk.'

Read more in Dutch on the police website.

If demonstrators do not follow the rules, they are first warned by the UvA and then, if necessary, by the police. Demonstrators are thereby asked to leave by a university representative. A report is filed if offenses are committed by protesters, or have been committed, such as vandalism or burglary.

The UvA also files a report if people's safety is at stake (for example, if areas or emergency exits are blocked) and if people refuse to leave UvA premises after closing time.

If a demonstration takes place on UvA grounds or in a UvA building, the university will call in the help of the police if our own security is not sufficient, or if things happen that lie outside their authority.

The competent authority (public prosecutor and/or mayor) can ultimately decide whether and how the police should act. The UvA’s only role here is to inform and assess the risks to the UvA.

• The police warn the protesters and, on behalf of the mayor, give them instructions to leave. If they do not comply, the mayor can prohibit the demonstration.
• The Public Prosecutor's Service or the mayor ultimately decides whether and how the police should act. It is not up to the University of Amsterdam (UvA) to determine how the police operate.
• In the most extreme case, the police are allowed to use force. This is subject to strict conditions and is always reviewed afterward.

Read more (in Dutch) on the police website.

The total cost of the damage caused by the occupations and destruction in May and June 2024 during protests on UvA campuses amounts to €4.1 million.

The UvA will recover damages from the perpetrators, if legally feasible. Unfortunately, in such situations, it is not always clear exactly who is responsible for what. Any damages that cannot be recovered from the perpetrators will be claimed from the UvA’s insurance.

The representatives of the activists had three demands in the week of 6 May:

• Full disclosure of all lines of communication with Israeli institutions and companies.
• Stopping all academic cooperation with Israeli institutions that participate in genocide, apartheid and colonial violence.
• Ending all contracts with companies that profit from genocide, apartheid and exploitation of the Palestinian people.

The UvA published an overview of all collaborations in which Israeli research groups participate (and thus not a list of names of individual academics), in order to comply with one of the demands. This information was already in the public domain.

To maintain a dialogue on dilemmas surrounding the war, the UvA organised a dialogue session on the Policy framework for collaboration with third parties. That dialogue session was similar to previous dialogue sessions around cooperation with the fossil fuel sector. 

Read more about collaboration with third parties.

Students demand that universities ‘divest from Israel’. What do they mean by this?

One of the demands made by students worldwide is that 'universities divest from Israel'. Divestment means reversing, or disposing of, an investment. So students are calling on universities to withdraw funds they have invested in organisations and companies linked to Israel.

What does ‘divest from Israel’ mean for the UvA in practice?

Nothing. In the US context, the call is concrete. There, students want universities and their endowment funds to actually divest. Since the UvA has no investments in Israel, it cannot ‘divest’.

Does the UvA have a direct financial benefit from collaborating with organisations and companies linked to Israel?

No. The UvA has no examples of collaboration with organisations and companies linked to Israel from which the UvA direct benefits financially.

What is the major difference with American universities where the demand to divest first emerged?

The main difference between Dutch and American universities is the method of funding. Dutch universities are largely publicly funded, while American universities are mostly privately funded. Private funding for American universities comes not only from very high tuition fees, but also from donations from wealthy individuals. Almost every US university has an ‘endowment fund’ that holds huge sums of money from endowments.

For example, Columbia University's endowment fund is worth $13.6 billion. The call from students in the US to divest from companies linked to Israel is not directed at the universities (which have no investments themselves), but at these endowment funds. While Dutch universities also do fundraising (through foundations), this is not at all comparable in scale to US endowment funds. The Amsterdam University Fund is one such foundation: small in size and with no financial investments in Israel.

The UvA has three so-called Memoranda of Understanding: one agreement for the exchange of 4, one of 6 and one of 8 students per year. One agreement is with the University of Tel Aviv and another with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the third with Ben Gurion University. None of the outgoing exchanges are currently active due to a negative travel advice from the Foreign Ministry.

In addition, UvA researchers participate in eight European research projects in which Israeli researchers or companies also participate. You can read more about our collaborations with Israeli organisations here.

Will the UvA break these ties?

We are very reluctant to limit institutional and individual collaborations. We see in collaboration with individual Israeli collaborators, provided the nature of the collaboration is in line with our academic mission, an opportunity to keep an open line of communication, so-called science diplomacy, even in times of war and conflict. Severing or suspending all ties also means severing relationships with researchers who often represent the critical voice in Israel.

We have been holding an internal discussion on the framework for collaboration with third parties (especially focused on countries in war situations). This was done in three steps: sharpen, test, decide. This approach is comparable to the dialogue sessions we organised previously around the topic of collaboration with the fossil fuel industry. The following plans have been formulated:

• A broad and inclusive ad hoc working group is working on recommendations for additions to the current evaluation framework. Experts in the field of (international) cooperation, including members of the Advisory Committee on Cooperation with Third Parties, are participating.
• In each faculty, roundtable discussions with staff and students took place in June. On 24 June there was a online town hall meeting for all who were interested.
• Through the online platform 'Denk mee' the working group sought input from the entire academic community between 1-5 July. There will also be a second input moment in the lead-up to drafting the final recommendations.
• The working group processed all the input received and prepared a preliminary recommendation to be discussed by the Executive Board on 9 July. In the coming period, the working group will also determine how quickly a final recommendation can be issued.  

We share the anger and bewilderment felt about the war. However, the UvA is not a political organisation. Our university should provide a home for debate and criticism, with consideration for everyone's input, background and beliefs, and with an eye for our academic values. We cannot properly fulfil that function if we, as an organisation take an explicit stance ourselves.

In March 2022, the UvA, together with other universities, the KNAW, the NWO and university medical centres, decided to freeze formal and institutional collaborations with educational and knowledge institutions in Russia and Belarus until further notice. That decision followed an urgent call to do so by the Dutch Minister of Education and Culture (OCW) in line with the extensive sanctions package announced by the European Union. Certain forms of cooperation have now been formally banned .  

Because many collaborations in education and research are based on peer-to-peer relationships, and many Russian and Belarusian researchers have publicly criticised the invasion of Ukraine at the risk of their own lives, research institutions gave their staff some freedom to maintain existing personal contacts with these researchers - where appropriate.  

You can read more about this decision in the statement (in Dutch) of Universiteiten van Nederland (UNL). 

The situation now is different from 2022, when EU sanctions preceded the joint decision of all universities. Severing or suspending all ties with Israel also means severing the open line of communication with researchers who in fact often constitute the country’s critical voice. The UvA values this kind of academic diplomacy - even in times of war and conflict - provided that the nature of the cooperation is in line with our academic mission. 

Read more about UvA's collaboration with Israeli research groups.

The UvA has set up a fund to provide assistance in various ways. We offer financial assistance to UvA students from the Palestinian territories or Israel who are in financial need because of the war. We also want to give students and scientists from Gaza the opportunity to come and study and work at the UvA. Read more about this fund.