After Khadija Arib’s departure from the House, many eyes are on chairman Vera Bergkamp: how will she explain this? The question is, however, whether she could have approached this much differently.
For Khadija Arib, the measure is full. On Saturday evening, she decided not to wait for the investigation into her functioning as Speaker of the House. She leaves the room. Appalled at the way the presidency has treated her.
She is not alone in this dismay. A group of prominent fellow MPs want to know from Bergkamp whether she acted thoughtfully. It is impossible to say whether this is the case as long as the exact nature of the complaints that arrived at Bergkamp by letter last summer is unknown. The fact is that Arib has a history of quite a few clashes with her staff. Whether there is a demanding boss – as she sees it herself – or a intimidating boss, cannot be determined without research. What is certain is that there are apparently people in the official organization of the House who were dreading having to work with Arib again now that she was going to work as chair of the committee that investigates corona policy. After all, such a committee is supported by the House staff.
Bergkamp is therefore in a difficult situation. It seems that she has tried to go through the whole process carefully. First an advice from the state attorney on how to weigh up the complaints legally, then deliberations in the presidium of the House of Representatives – precisely to prevent this from becoming a case of the new against the old chairman.
When the nine-member presidency unanimously directed a substantive investigation, a meeting with Arib was scheduled, after which the matter was leaked before that meeting had taken place. There is no indication that Bergkamp had a hand in that – it seems to have happened to her too – although she could have expected it once she discussed the file with eight other politicians. Little remains a secret at the Binnenhof.
Arib is especially furious that Bergkamp did not first come to her with the complaints, instead of the state attorney, but overlooks the fact that an employer must also protect the complainants. Immediately approaching the accused is usually not a safe solution for people who already have to overcome a high threshold to report. It is now beyond dispute that Arib was badly damaged by the proceedings, even before an investigation has taken place.
With this, the whole case shows once again that the country is crying out for a clear protocol on how organizations should act in such cases: what are the steps to be taken, when should the various parties involved be informed and how is everyone’s safety as much as possible? protected? Mariëtte Hamer, who has been the government commissioner for transgressive behavior since the spring, has a lot of promising work to do.
The position of the newspaper is expressed in the Volkskrant Commentaar. It is created after a discussion between the commentators and the editor-in-chief.