Emotions quickly run high on Tuesday evening during a parliamentary meeting in which the proposed investigation into Arib is discussed. ‘Based on one or two anonymous letters, fellow MPs have started the hunt for another MP. Arib is the victim of a political settlement,” says PVV MP Gidi Markuszower. Later he speaks of a ‘political assassination’ by the current Speaker of the House Bergkamp (D66) and the executive committee of the House (Presidium), which ordered the investigation.
Although other MPs distance themselves from the PVV’s words, they have concerns – from left to right – about the investigation into the former Speaker of the House. Independent MP Omtzigt and MPs Leijten (SP), Kathmann (PvdA), Van Esch (Party for the Animals), Van der Plas (BBB) and Pouw-Verweij (JA21) point to letters from three professors who, like them, have criticize the way the investigation into Arib has been handled so far.
Among other things, the professors have difficulty with the fact that the top officials themselves say they have been a victim of Arib, but that the top also wants to be the principal of the research into Arib. It is also surprising that the actions of the President of the House, the Registrar and the Presidium are not part of the investigation, while they also played a role in the actions that led to Arib’s departure.
Some of the MPs now openly suggest that they have little confidence in the presidium, because that body is said to have leaked about the investigation into Arib’s behavior. “I’ve never had any problems with the presidency. But the presidium has made it political by leaking,” said JA21 MP Pouw-Verweij on Tuesday.
Stop research
Bergkamp considers the criticism and requests for clarification as ‘valuable reflections’ that she will discuss with the presidency, as emerged during the parliamentary debate, but does not intend to make her own role, that of the clerk or the presidency, part of the investigation.
Due to Omtzigt’s intervention, she is now forced to do so. In a chaotic vote, a majority of the committee supports his call for the investigation to be suspended until the exact confirmation of the assignment has been shared with the House and the presidency issues a formal response to all criticisms of the professors.
Bergkamp is therefore under great pressure to discuss the criticism with the other presidium members as early as Wednesday. The result could be that a decision may already be made this week to suspend or restructure the investigation into Arib.
Meanwhile, Arib was still furious on Tuesday about the inquiry ordered into her by the presidency. She was previously told through the press that the investigation into her had been started at all and she is not allowed to know exactly what she would have done wrong. Due to this state of affairs, she decided to leave on Tuesday without the usual farewell rituals in the Chamber, such as flowers, a reception and a farewell speech by Bergkamp.
It leads to great inconvenience in the Chamber. “This does not leave me indifferent,” said Omtzigt. ‘What kind of parliament are we that we all let this happen, that we fail to deal with a serious matter in a serious way?’