Who owns the central lawn on REC?
Since last Monday, pro-Palestinian demonstrators have been camping on the central lawn of the REC, popularly known as “Roetersweiland”. There are no plans to clear the site (for the time being). But who actually owns the lawn?
To camp or not to camp, to clear or not to clear, to stay overnight or not to stay overnight. For the past year, the central lawn of the Roeterseiland Campus (REC) has been used irregularly by pro-Palestinian demonstrators who set up tents there and want to spend the night. This regularly raises the question of who actually owns the lawn: the UvA, or the municipality? Or a third party?
Brazilian fig tree
The issue is quite complicated, but then again, not really. Various UvA users of the lawn all say that the lawn is Eigen Terrein (private property) and therefore belongs to the UvA. Three years ago, the UvA – in this case the Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB) – planted six trees on the lawn, including a Brazilian fig tree, to mark the FEB’s centenary. According to those involved at the time, these would never have been planted if the land had not belonged to the UvA, if only because the municipality could have had the trees removed – planting trees indiscriminately on municipal land is not permitted.
Construction
About ten years ago – when the UvA predicted that student numbers would skyrocket – there were plans to build on the lawn for educational purposes. The UvA was roundly ridiculed for this (among others by residents of the Plantagebuurt neighbourhood, who feared crowds and spoiling their view). The UvA decided against it.
In exchange, the (temporary) REC-V educational building was built on what was then known as the “Petit Versailles” postage stamp park. The neighbourhood was furious about this too, but it went ahead anyway. The UvA’s Housing Development and Real Estate departments also confirm that the lawn is owned by the UvA, as is the entire REC, including the small car park on Valckenierstraat.
Fences
Ultimately, a spokesperson for the UvA also states that the lawn is owned by the UvA. “However, following last year’s demonstrations, the Public Prosecution Service decided that the area is nevertheless public accessible land and that camping therefor does not constitute a breach of disinheritance. The municipality of Amsterdam has adopted this ruling, and we are therefore leaving it up to the municipality to decide whether or not to intervene.” Incidentally, the situation would be different if the UvA were to fence off this “meadow” (as it did last year), because then it would no longer be public accessible.
