On 13 June 2024, the LHG (Liberale Hochschulgruppen) Hessen and the JuLis (Junge Liberale) Hessen published a joint press release about this year's HST (Hochschultage) and the AStA.
Since we think that the press release is populist, either distorts facts or completely makes them up, and thus damages not only the reputation of the AStA, but above all that of our 1st chairwoman, we have decided to set a few things straight.
"Children's make-up, fake news and marginalisation - the Hochschultage in Fulda" is the lurid headline chosen by the LHG Hessen and JuLis. It not only gives the impression that the HST can be summarised with three terms, of which "children's make-up" is at least true, but also leads one to expect that this will be substantiated later. Instead, both accusations are repeated, but neither documented with photos nor quotes. From an academic point of view alone, you can expect more from students!
"The liberals are firmly on the side of Israel and our constitution."
That is the right of the liberals and of everyone, but we would like to point out one thing: By continuing the offensive in Rafah alone, Israel has disregarded a legally binding, final judgement of the ICJ (International Court of Justice) of 24 May 2024, which demanded an immediate halt to it.1
---
1 Subsequent note from 20.06.2024: we have received criticism that the clarity of the judgment is disputed even among the judges involved ([1], [2]). We apologize that we did not come across these reports during our research. We assumed that the ICJ's short and simply worded judgment would leave no room for interpretation, and our research into the interpretation of the judgment by the press largely confirmed this assumption ([3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]).
---
Although Israel invokes its right to self-defence, it is nevertheless bound by international humanitarian law. Should we stand firmly on the side of a state that the ICJ fears is violating the Genocide Convention? And would that even be compatible with our constitution?2
---
2 Subsequent note from 20.06.2024: we also received criticism for this final question.
We do not want to raise the question of whether solidarity with Israel is unconstitutional, but whether it is in the spirit of our constitution to stand firmly by a state if it violates the Genocide Convention.
---
In the next section, the LHG and JuLis accuse the AStA of "exceeding its competences", among other things because our 1st chairwoman is said to have "publicly railed against the EU at a pro-European event".
The event in question was the rally organised by the citizens' initiative "Pulse of Europe" on 2 June 2024 on the Uniplatz in Fulda, which was intended to mark the end of a series of rallies for the European elections. Their motto: "Defend the heart of Europe - with your vote!". According to the Fuldaer Zeitung newspaper, one of the main aims of the pre-event was "to draw attention to the importance of the European elections on 9 June, but also to send a signal against right-wing extremism."
We find the accusation by the LHG and JuLis questionable in many respects:
Our 1st chairwoman was personally invited by "Pulse of Europe" via email to give a speech as a "representative of the students". In her acceptance, however, she directly announced that she would give this speech "as a student voice [...], but [...] not on behalf of the AStA [...] or on behalf of all students" and that this could not be "a speech free of criticism". As a forewarning, she directly named a few points of criticism and left the decision as to whether a critical speech should be realised to the citizens' initiative, which responded positively and explicitly allowed criticism.
If even a pro-European citizens' initiative has no problem with criticism of the EU at its rally, we wonder why the LHG and JuLis are upset about it.
Where and when else should the criticism take place? We know nothing about anti-European events in Fulda, are not invited to such events and would not even want to appear there.
Just as we can be happy about the existence of the EU on many levels, we should also be allowed to name its dark sides, e.g. the "out of control" EU agency Frontex, as our 1st chairwoman has done.
Anyone who really listened to the speech should have easily rediscovered the two core concerns mentioned:
"The EU is not what it says it is, but we can make it what it should be. Europe must develop as a social space that aims to create international solidarity. This is precisely why it is important to take action against the shift to the right and to vote for parties that have such a vision of the EU. I would therefore like you to use your vote on 9 June."
And later:
"I ask you to inform yourselves, go vote and use the voice that others don't have to demand policies that are actually democratic. We need a Europe based on solidarity, peace, democracy and human dignity."
The fact that AStA members are invited to speak at rallies nationwide has been an established practice for decades. If the LHG and JuLis would like this to be done solely in an uncritical, pat-on-the-back manner, we must inform them that we cannot comply. But they are welcome to do so.
In the following passage of their joint press release, which deals with the existence of a stand at the Hochschultage, the LHG and JuLis themselves use the practice of spreading "fake news" of which they are accused.
The name of the group responsible for the stand, which is not "Palestine for HS Fulda" but actually "Students for Palestine HS Fulda" (short: Students for Palestine), was misquoted right at the beginning, but we would like to see much more careful research in future.
In a subordinate clause to the fact that the AStA approved the group's stand at the HST, it is then stated that "Students for Palestine" is "a university group not recognised by the university itself".
This makes it sound as if an application for recognition as a university group had been rejected, which is not the case. And whether a student stand is approved for the HST has nothing to do with whether it comes from a recognised university group or not.
"An unregistered demonstration was actively disguised as an information stand and an attempt was made to prevent a registered counter-protest."
The stall, which sold cakes on a donation basis to raise money for the evacuation of Palestinian family members of a man living in Fulda from the Gaza Strip, had already been held on campus in almost exactly the same way before the HST.
Even then, it was not an "unregistered demonstration", but simply an information stand registered with the university.
Neither AStA nor "Students for Palestine" tried to "disguise" anything as an information stand - that's exactly what it was. It was only when the local authorities were called in that they categorised the stand as an "assembly", which none of those present had a problem with.
On Friday, we then received the news that there would be a registered "counter demonstration" against the stand on Saturday afternoon. We were actually not thrilled about the announcement, but not because we wouldn't allow any other opinions - we thought it was a shame that the peaceful, open-minded approach of those responsible for the stand was apparently not noticed and that no efforts were made to enter into a dialogue at any time that we were aware of.
We do not understand the accusation that we actively tried to prevent the counter-protest, and we are also surprised why such a serious accusation is not explained in more detail or substantiated.
The next accusation, again without proof (photo), is not long in coming:
"Anyone who seriously thinks it is right[,] to display pictures of dead children next to the children's face painting on Family Day should not be representing the student body."
Fortunately, we set ourselves the standard of not only trying to represent the student body, but the entire student body in Fulda.
We also decided in advance that pictures containing injuries, corpses or other hard-to-digest scenes should not be hung directly on the stand throughout the festival.
In the preliminary discussion we had with several people responsible for the stand, we stipulated, among other requirements, that there must be a closed folder or book for such images, which can only be viewed on request at the back of the stand. As far as we can tell (we do not monitor the stands 24/7), this requirement was implemented and no images of dead children were visible at any time.
"If the Foreigners' Advisory Council of the city of Fulda then also advertises this event, where misinformation and the loudest dominate, this violates the neutrality requirement and does not represent all citizens of Fulda with a migration background."
Unfortunately, misinformation dominates this press release.
And the stand was "loud" or "the loudest" for the few minutes during which the counter-demonstration took place in front of the stand and the members of the stand shouted "Ceasefire now" and "Free, free Palestine" to make it clear what they were there for - an immediate ceasefire and a Palestine liberated from war.
"What we experienced here in Fulda leaves us speechless. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. Free teaching and free research are suffering more and more from the one-sided political attitude of a small but very loud minority of students at Hessian universities. Lectures can't take place because some members of the AStA don't want them to, university groups or fellow students are marginalised or endangered because they don't share the same opinion."
We don't know how the other AStAs in Hesse are acting.
For this reason, and because we are not aware of or have not been informed of a single incident in which we as AStA have rejected lectures, marginalised or even endangered university groups or fellow students, we find it damaging to our reputation to make such a list in this press release.
"Universities must not provide a place for marginalisation, violence or bans on opinions."
Absolutely right, but we wonder why these things are listed in a press release that is directed against us. None of this has taken place on our part.
"The Hochschultage have been characterised by the fact that they bring people together regardless of their political views, and the AStA in Fulda is breaking with this decades-long tradition"
In what way was this not possible at the Hochschultage? If we had really wanted to, we could have had an objective discussion about the topic at the "Students for Palestine" stand. We realised this not only in the preliminary discussion with three students who represented the group, but also at the University Days themselves.
"Instead of bringing people together, the AStA unilaterally sided with a loud minority who are more interested in shouting than democratic discourse. What's more[,] the AStA chairwoman actively tried[,] to prevent civilised discourse!"
The AStA did not take sides. A "Students for Israel" stand could just as easily have applied and we would have invited them to a preliminary discussion so that they could prove to us that objective discourse would take place there.
To use the word "discourse" so often, but not to have been at the stand to talk to the students responsible or to us, but only to organise a counter-demonstration directly in front of it, is somewhat ironic. The same applies to the publication of this press release, which could have been preceded by a dialogue.
And we would still very much like to know how our 1st chairwoman is supposed to have actively tried to prevent civilised discourse! Otherwise, this statement reads like public defamation, which, by the way, is a criminal offence.
"If unannounced demonstrations are disguised as an information stand, then it is up to the university presidium to enforce domiciliary rights"
We have already explained above why the first sentence is wrong. The LHG and JuLis can't know that the second is (unless they had sought dialogue with us): the university presidium hands over the domiciliary rights for the university days to the AStA board, which in turn passes it on to the security service so that they can ban people from entering the building even without our constant presence in the event of conflicts.
However, this doesn't matter, because from the moment the stand was categorised as an "assembly" by the authorities, the right of assembly applied there, which takes precedence over domiciliary rights. Just as the registered counter-demonstration was subject to the right of assembly, so we couldn't have prevented it, apart from the fact that we didn't want to.
"Especially when an intifada is called for, universities should make it clear: If necessary, we will guarantee safe Jewish life by all means of the rule of law."
In our opinion, this is the only justified point of criticism in this press release. It is true that a sign that was not visible on the stand during the University Days, but was taken out for a group photo on the day of dismantling, read "Yallah Intifada", among other things.
This sign had already been used in the past by those responsible for the stand and at the time was accompanied by an information leaflet intended to convey the original meaning of the word "Intifada" ("uprising/rebellion"). However, since the second intifada, which was characterised by violence, this term has also had negative connotations.
For this reason, we asked the group in advance not to use this sign, and when it was used for the group photo after all, we drew the consequences and withheld the stand deposit of €100 for one day (= not returned).
For a non-commercial stand that wanted to raise money by selling cakes on a donation basis, we think this is a considerable sum.
We asked the two students who represented the group in the follow-up discussion to delete the group photo and other photos with the sign and to reconsider the use of this negatively connoted term and, if necessary, to refrain from using it.
"Together with the Liberal University Groups, the Young Liberals organised a small registered counter-protest action. After an attempt by the AStA to stop it, the city police ensured that it went ahead. The organisations would like to thank them for this."
This is the third time this accusation has been made, again without proof.
We would still like to know to what extent the municipal police had to ensure that the event took place. They were there anyway, but only because they were constantly called to the stand.
Not because anyone wanted to prevent a counter-demonstration.
Finally, we would like to address all the people we have not yet been able to address in this statement due to other corrections:
to the Jewish and/or Israeli students who we, just like everyone else, are trying to represent and advocate for their concerns and problems.
We don't want to give you the feeling that you won't be heard by us.
You are cordially invited to our public meetings and can visit us at the AStA at almost any time.
We are available as often as possible for your personal concerns as well as for an open discourse on the Israel-Palestine issue.
If it is possible at such short notice, we would like to organise an event in Café Chaos this summer semester, where we want to let "both sides" have their say under professional moderation. Instead of focussing on one side or the other, however, we would prefer all of us to appear there as people who enter into conversation objectively and as impartially as possible.
That has always been our aim.
We hope that our words will provide clarification and not cause further resentment.
We would like to extend our hand to the LHG and the JuLis.
Even though we are more than disappointed by their press release and expect an apology, especially to our 1st chairwoman, we invite them to a dialogue.
Feel free to contact us - you know where to find us.
Your AStA
