Approach to reporting cross-border behaviour at Ghent University: reaction Rector Rik Van de Walle

"I regret that the contacts the university had with the former PhD student did not lead to a solution. The university should provide a safe working environment to every employee at all times. But the author of the book did not experience the university as an institution that provides a safe working environment at all times. Although the facts date back to a period when I myself was not the Rector, I feel it is my duty today to acknowledge that we failed as a university at the time and apologise for this on behalf of the university.

Fundamentally I believe that any serious report of possible cross-border behaviour or abuse of power deserves a preliminary investigation, à charge and à discharge (which means considering both incriminating and exculpatory evidence).

Specifically, a preliminary investigation means that people with the necessary expertise take the matter to heart and the Rector makes a decision on the results of that preliminary investigation. That may lead to a referral to the disciplinary board and the appointment of a case manager to follow up on the case.  That is what I myself always do with serious reports.

Clearly, this is not the path that Ghent University followed in 2014; our legal experts were not instructed to carry out a preliminary investigation à charge and à discharge at the time. In my view, this was a misjudgement. To mention just one element in this context: potential reputational damage in itself can never, in my opinion, be a reason not to forward cases for further investigation.

This assessment, which was made in 2014, helped to ensure that the report submitted in 2022 was, at that time, disciplinary time-barred. Therefore, at that time, no preliminary investigation à charge and à décharge could be started anymore.

In terms of policy around reports and working towards a healthy working environment in which respectful behaviour is central, we have already come a long way since 2016. At the same time, it is clear that this must remain a key priority for the entire university community.

Today, the (alleged) facts from 2011 are disciplinary time-barred. This deprives me of the tool of a preliminary investigation à charge and à décharge with a view to whether or not to initiate disciplinary proceedings. By stating this, I am not making any judgment on what the outcome of such a preliminary investigation would have been if our legal experts had been instructed to conduct it in 2014.

Based on a number of claims that are now being made and were not previously communicated to me, I will invite the author of the book for a discussion on this. I will also speak with the former Rector and dean concerned. Naturally, I will also speak with the professor the author is talking about.

Based on what I learn during these talks, I will examine together with our legal experts, the prevention services and possibly other relevant authorities what is or is not appropriate with regard to the professor concerned, in the light of his current position and function at Ghent University.”