BON loses lawsuit over English-language education
For the time being, there will be no ban on new English-language programs at universities and colleges. Vereniging Beter Onderwijs Nederland has lost its preliminary relief proceedings against Maastricht and Twente.
Image: Image bank Rechtspraak.nl
The argument of Better Education Netherlands (BON) was 'admittedly passionate', the judge writes her verdict, but still lost out to the legal arguments of the two universities.
The BON association focused on the psychology courses of the University of Twente and Maastricht University. They would have switched to English as the working language without necessity.
But the two universities put forward all kinds of arguments that BON could not properly refute. They are located in border regions and believe that a high-quality international learning environment benefits the quality of education. Moreover, the scientific literature is already in English anyway.
High level
According to the judge, BON did not object much to this, apart from general objections to Anglicisation on which the judge cannot take a position. For example, BON argues that English-language education hinders students' ability to express themselves in Dutch. It would be much more difficult to achieve a high academic level.
The judge considered it quite possible that universities would switch to offering English-taught programs without necessity, but the Education Inspectorate is considering that and that investigation is still ongoing. The preliminary relief judge considers it 'not opportune' to anticipate this and make a far-reaching ruling, such as prohibiting Anglicisation.
The Minister of Education must supervise anglicisation and, if necessary, can adopt further legislation or regulations 'that do justice to all current circumstances and interests involved', the judge added.
Our team
Interestingly, BON has been declared admissible. The lawyers of the University of Twente, in particular, did their best to combat this admissibility with all kinds of legal maneuvers. For example, why had BON not first tried to consult with the university? That's how it should be, right?
Not only has BON been drawing attention to this case for years and the university could well have been aware of all the objections to Anglicization, it is also 'evident' according to the judge that BON would not have made any progress in consultation with the University of Twente.
