Judge: Dismissal of professor Joost Herman was justified
Judge: Dismissal of professor Joost Herman was justified
Door Giulia Fabrizi
By Giulia Fabrizi
Giulia Fabrizi
Van uit de hand gelopen studentenfeestjes tot bezette universiteitsgebouwen en van kamertekorten tot dreigende bezuinigingen: Giulia houdt al het nieuws in de gaten. Ze praat graag met de mensen die het aangaat, schrijft erover en begeleidt freelancers bij het maken van nieuwsartikelen. Eerder werkte ze als stadsredacteur Groningen en gemeenteverslaggever Haren voor Dagblad van het Noorden.Herman was fired in January of this year for subsidies fraud and falsification of documents. The university also started a civil procedure against him, demanding he pay the institute nearly 1.2 million euros.
A few weeks ago, the professor demanded before the court that the UG undo the dismissal. However, the judge says the university did nothing wrong.
Herman has a great track record and has done a lot for the UG during his twenty-five years of working there, the court said. But that does not negate the fact that he ‘made and acted on decisions that violated the UG’s interests to such an extent that the UG cannot reasonably be expected to continue the working relationship’.
Burnout
During the court session, Herman’s lawyer said that Herman suffered a burnout because of his work at the university and that he therefore couldn’t be fired. The judge disagreed, saying grounds for Herman’s dismissal have nothing to do with the burnout.
Herman is alleged to have used the private foundation Stichting NOHA Groningen (SNG) to gain access to European subsidies that were intended to go to the Groningen NOHA programme. The UG says the foundation was set up without its knowledge and therefore the funds were used outside the university’s purview.
The RUG says this enabled Herman to expense ‘large amounts’ of money and give this to other employees and third parties.
Reprehensible
Because Herman controlled the European subsidies through SNG, he took that control away from the UG, the judge said.
Herman also made it impossible for the UG to decide how to spend the funds. These actions were ‘reprehensible’ and made Herman ‘culpable’. The fact that he didn’t intend to profit off his actions or harm the UG doesn’t change the fact of the matter, the judge said.
More
- UG stands fast in NOHA court case
- Petition for fired professor: ‘RUG’s attitude in NOHA case is…
- Fraud? Self-enrichment? What does the report say?
- NOHA Brussels misses out on 500K
- RUG could have known about Stichting NOHA Groningen
- 5 questions about NOHA and the fraud case
- Another fraud case at the RUG