New CSR chair Stefana Feciuc: “Students have little to say at UvA”
New Central Student Council president Stefana Feciuc wants the Executive Board to acknowledge “mistakes made” around Palestine demonstrations. “Students cannot focus on studies because the UvA is complicit in what is happening in Palestine.”
The Central Student Council (CSR) has had a new face since September, but the direction remains largely the same. Like the previous CSR chair, master student European law Stefana Feciuc (24) is a delegate of the radical-left Activist Party, does not speak fluent Dutch in interviews, for example, and is critical of the functioning of the Executive Board. Particularly when it comes to Palestine demonstrations, because, according to Feciuc, the board does not listen to the concerns of protesting students and instead sends police units at them, creating “unsafe situations”.
Last year, this led the CSR to withdraw confidence in the board. A last resort, according to Feciuc, and one that the CSR (and therefore Feciuc himself) still supports. It is up to the board to step in, the new CSR chair believes.
This attitude will most likely not make talks between the board and the CSR any easier. Through a mediation process, they are nevertheless trying to come a little closer together. “A kind of relationship therapy,” Feciuc says jokingly. How is she looking at the upcoming year? Despite the struggles with the board, is she hopeful that her plans will be realised?
Last year, you were also on the CSR. Why did you want to add another year to it and then, moreover, as chairman?
“I think there is still a lot of work to be done. Unlike someone from the board or the Central Works Council, as a member of the CSR you only have one term to achieve everything on the agenda, but of course you can’t do that at all. On a personal level, for instance, I see gains to be made in the areas of gender-neutral toilets and the distribution of menstrual products, two issues from my portfolio last year. These are still far too absent on campus.”
And what are the main themes for you in the coming year as chair of the CSR?
“Firstly, as CSR, it is important to ensure that diversity and inclusion are not sacrificed by education cuts from the new right-wing government. In addition, it is necessary for the Executive Board to hear and take seriously the concerns of protesting students. That means talking through academic boycotts for Israeli educational and research institutions. There were also mistakes made by the board during the protests, which need to be acknowledged. For instance, the safety of protesting students came under pressure due to the presence of police on campus.”
This even led the CSR to withdraw confidence in the administration last year. Was there no softer option possible?
“No, there was no other way for us to let it be known that we did not feel heard by the board on Palestine, an issue we see as a huge problem. Far too little was done with our formal letters. Therefore, we did have to withdraw trust from them, something that is a big thing, I realise; the last time that happened was at the 2015 Maagdenhuis occupation.”
Now you have entered a mediaton process with the board, how is that going?
“We prefer not to say too much about it. But it is a good step that we have entered this trajectory so that the board knows where our views are coming from. We as CSR want to start focusing on restoring the connection between students and the university anyway, because we don't want a weak relationship with the environment in which we exist.”
Yet one of your party’s views is that there is more to be gained for students outside the council than within it. Do you see this differently, now that you yourself are chairman of the CSR?
“Because of the way co-determination is structured at the UvA, we have very little power as the CSR. I think there is a lot of frustration about that among students. The UvA speaks the language of bureaucracy, instead of communicating with their students. An example: after the protests, the university set up an ethics committee to review the cooperation criteria with education and research institutions, which hardly included the students’ perspective. We were very underrepresented there.”
But surely the UvA then put the draft outcomes online and opened them up for feedback by anyone within the university?
“That’s exactly what I mean: it’s a language of bureaucracy. We only talk about online feedback, while there is no democratic meeting in which solutions can be sought. And this is necessary, because I think many students cannot focus on their studies now because their university is complicit in what is happening in Palestine.”
There is, of course, a democratic meeting, that between the CSR (democratically elected), the Central Works Council (COR) and the administration. The so-called Joint Assembly (JV).
“That is a democratic institution, but that does not mean we should rely on that alone. Participation is important to get people involved in university structures, but I also think grassroot organisations - groups of students who come together and collectively focus on a particular issue - should be given a stage to discuss with the university.”
So you advocate for more direct democracy alongside the indirect democracy of co-determination. In addition, how do you think the university should deal with demonstrations? Another means of expressing your opinion.
“I don’t think the university handles this well. They assume by default that demonstrations are violent, which is not necessarily so. Just as they also assume that anonymity at demonstrations is a bad thing. After all, they have banned that in their house rules. But being anonymous is protected under international and national law, as demonstrators may otherwise feel restricted in their demonstration freedom by pressure from regulators.’’
Are you also in favour of occupations and overnight stays on campus?
“Occupations and overnight stays on campus are not necessarily prohibited by law, something the house rules suggest by prohibiting it. If the UvA wants a serious conversation about Palestine, perhaps they shouldn’t impose disproportionate conditions on every event that seeks to draw attention to it. Like closing the campus doors the moment protests are in the air.’’
What will you do differently from your predecessor?
“I want to take a more consensus-based approach. There are different parties in the SRC, so consensus is something that is hard to achieve, but this approach means that we talk about problems until we all fully understand them and can hold a common position. With that, I am not necessarily going to do it completely differently from last year, I am mainly going to do it better.’’
