The Executive Board of the University of Twente, considering, in view of social developments, that it is desirable for the university to adopt a scheme on the reporting of irregularities, has decided to adopt:
The Reporting of Irregularities Scheme University of Twente,
Article 1.1. Definitions
- In this scheme the following is understood to mean:
- the university: the University of Twente;
- suspicion of an irregularity: a suspicion based on reasonable grounds relating to the university or part thereof regarding:
- a serious offence;
- a gross violation of regulations;
- misrepresentations to the accountant appointed for the university;
- a serious danger to the public health, safety or the environment; or
- deliberately holding back information on these facts;
- superior: the manager of the organisational unit within which there is a suspicion of an irregularity.
- Employee, or student, is also understood to mean:
- another person working within the university, such as a visiting lecturer, a student on work placement of temp;
- a student enrolled in a training programme of the university that is not mentioned in the Central Register Training Programme Higher Education.
Article 2.1. Internal report to superior
- The employee or student who has a suspicion of an irregularity reports this to the superior in question.
- The superior sends the employee or student who has reported a suspicion of an irregularity a conformation of receipt, which states the reported suspicion of an irregularity and the time at which the employee or student reported the suspicion.
- The superior referred to in the first paragraph sees to it that the Executive Board is informed forthwith of the reported suspicion of an irregularity and the date on which the report was received.
- Following a report of a suspicion of an irregularity the superior starts an investigation immediately.
- In deviation of the provisions laid down in the previous paragraphs, the employee or student can report any suspicion of an irregularity to the Executive Board directly if serious interests are inconsistent with the applicability of these paragraphs.
- If the report concerns a suspicion of an irregularity committed by the Executive Board or by one or more of its members, the report is made to the Supervisory Board.
Article 2.2. A position
- Within a period of eight weeks from the moment of the internal report, the employee or student is informed in writing by or on behalf of the superior of a position as regards content on the reported suspicion of an irregularity.
- If it is impossible to formulate a position within eight weeks, the employee or student is informed of this by or on behalf of the superior and of the period within which he or she can expect this position.
The staff member or student who with due observance of the provisions laid down in this scheme has reported a suspicion of an irregularity, will in no way whatsoever be disadvantaged in his or her position within the university as a result of the report, insofar as he or she acts in good faith and has no personal gain in the irregularity or reporting thereof.
Article 4.1. Entry into force
This scheme enters into force on 1 March 2005.
Article 4.2. Citing
This scheme can be cited as the Reporting of Irregularities Scheme University of Twente.
The Dutch text of this regulation is binding. In case of a difference of interpretation, this translation cannot be used for legal purposes.
In view of the social developments the Executive Board considers it desirable that it is ensured that employees and students have the possibility to report to the Executive Board, or an officer appointed by this board, on alleged irregularities of a general, operational or financial nature within the university and that as a consequence of this these employees and students cannot be disadvantaged in their position within the university. Alleged irregularities in relation to the functioning of members of the Executive Board, will be reported to the Supervisory Board.
We include here the draft of the scheme. Key concept is the “suspicion of an irregularity” (art. 1.1, first paragraph under b). This should be a suspicion based on reasonable grounds on an offence, a gross violation of (internal or external) regulations, misrepresentations to the accountant appointed for the university, a serious danger to the public health, the security or the environment or deliberately holding back of information about these facts. These facts must of course relate to the university or part of the university (faculty, department, institute, educational unit, service department etc.).
The employee or student who has a suspicion of an irregularity should report this to the superior of the organisational unit within which the irregularity is suspected (art. 2.1, first paragraph). For the superior is the person responsible for the course of events within his or her unit. This may be the dean, the head of a service department, director education, the academic director of the institute, etc., depending on the organisational unit in hand. There are two exceptions to this rule. There may be serious interests that are inconsistent with the applicability of this rule (art.2.1, fifth paragraph). For example, if the superior is the very person against whom there exists a suspicion of an irregularity. In this case the employee or student can report the suspicion of an irregularity directly to the Executive Board. The suspicion of an irregularity can also concern the Executive Board or one or more of its members. In this case the report is to be made to the Supervisory Board (art. 2.1, sixth paragraph).
The superior, the Executive Board or the Supervisory Board is to send the employee or student who has made the report a confirmation of receipt (art. 2.1, second paragraph). They must also inform the Executive Board (art. 2.1, third paragraph). Following the report the superior or, where appropriate, the Executive Board or the Supervisory Board, will institute an investigation (art. 2.1, fourth and sixth paragraph).
The investigation, instituted by the superior or, where appropriate, the Executive Board or the Supervisory Board, will result in a position as regards content (art. 2.2, first and second paragraph). If the position gives rise to this, measures will have to be taken such as termination of the apparent undesired situation or practice, reporting to the police of an offence, a ban to enter the university premises or buildings or a disciplinary sanction, all this of course in accordance with the prevailing regulations.
The staff member or student who has reported on alleged irregularities may in no way whatsoever be disadvantaged in his or her position within the university. Of course in so far as he or she acts in good faith and has no personal gain in the irregularity or reporting thereof. This has been explicitly laid down in the scheme
(art. 3.1). Where appropriate, he or she can invoke this both in and out of court.