The Student Parliament (Stupa)

URGENT APPEAL AGAINST THE PLANNED ABOLITION OF THE CIVIL CLAUSE

Kassel, June 17, 2026

Dear Member of the Senate,

On July 1, 2026, you will make a decision of far-reaching significance. This is not merely a formal matter of university bylaws, but concerns the fundamental orientation of the German university landscape: Will it remain committed to exclusively civilian scholarship, or will it follow the gradual trend toward the remilitarization of scientific and cultural public life?

By voting against the Civil Clause, the University of Kassel—which stands for civilian, non-military scholarship—would abandon this clear orientation as well as its commitment to sustainability and contribute to the national and global trend of an arms race.

The Peace Policy Mandate for Universities

Throughout human history, educational and academic institutions have always had a special role and responsibility: to support societal decision-making processes through their ability to analyze complex historical events, foster discussion, and assess future consequences. They are also the ones that offer a counterpoint to simplistic, populist—and at times bellicose—answers to highly complex questions, and pose the question: How can we not only prevent wars, but also build peace? What conditions and developments contribute to large-scale escalations, even leading to world wars? What is the responsibility of science in this regard?

Albert Einstein had an unequivocal stance on this:

“Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding.”

Arms and military research hinder civilian conflict resolution efforts, fuel the global arms race, cause incomparable damage to the climate and the environment, destroy lives instead of bringing people together, exacerbate displacement and migration, appeals to people’s basest instincts, and leads to destruction. In its 2023 recommendation, UNESCO states that education should be oriented toward peace, human rights, international understanding, and sustainable development, and that peace is an active process. A university that strays from this not only loses its guiding principle but also repeats a mistake it has already made in the past.

The University President’s Course

As recently as 2025, Ms. Clement was quoted by the HNA as saying:

“I am quite certain that we can make a significant contribution to Germany’s security in ways other than through arms research.”

This statement must still hold true a year later. We would like to appeal to you, as a member of the Senate, to uphold this commitment and preserve the civil clause at the University of Kassel.

After all, the research is clear: more weapons do not automatically lead to greater security. The Swedish peace research institute SIPRI shows that international arms deliveries in 2020–24 reached the second-highest level since the end of the Cold War. At the same time, in its June 10, 2026, article titled “Are Weapons and Ammunition Ending Up on the Black Market?,” Tagesschau reports on EU-supplied weapons from Ukraine that are already being used in an uncontrolled manner for crimes and murders in entirely different settings: An inherent characteristic of weapons. They are inevitably used as tools of killing until they are taken out of circulation.

“Death is a master from Kassel”

…is what the renowned poet Paul Celan might have written with regard to our city—and, unfortunately, he would still be right today, even after two world wars: Kassel is one of Europe’s largest manufacturers of military weapons for the entire world. Accordingly, even when the “civil clause” was first introduced, many people were watching this arms manufacturing stronghold and its university with keen interest, as the university once again makes itself a vulnerable target in German history. The university’s decision sends a signal to Germany’s entire educational landscape and to Germany itself. It would set a precedent for the postwar Federal Republic of Germany: The university would bear the inglorious title of being the first institution of higher education to abolish an effective civil clause, while other universities are currently deciding to introduce the civil clause and oppose the promotion of armed conflicts (University of Cologne in 2025, Kiel cluster in preparation). Currently, approximately 80 universities have a civil clause in effect. To now abolish an achievement such as the 2013 civil clause through a simple vote behind closed doors—as a reservist and other Senate members may wish— does not do justice to a university’s sociopolitical mission and turns the hollow image of the “Sustainable University” into its exact opposite.

The Revised Version—A Useless Smokescreen

Upon first reading the “amended” version of the University of Kassel’s constitution, the untrained reader might conclude: There’s a lot about peace in there—so why all the fuss? However, the concept of peace has undergone a particularly problematic shift in political language. While peace originally denoted the absence of war and organized violence, it is now so frequently perverted that even military and violent acts can sometimes be deemed “peaceful,” provided they supposedly serve peaceful purposes and come from the desired direction. Violence is no longer understood as the opposite of peace and thus loses its normative distinction. The current civil clause reads:

“Research and development, teaching, and studies at the University of Kassel are committed exclusively to peaceful goals and are intended to serve civilian purposes; research—in particular the development and optimization of technical systems—as well as studies and teaching are geared toward civilian use.”

The framing device of “a turning point/a changing world/a new reality” used to legitimize

…is also reflected in the Executive Board’s reasoning. Such phrasing does not serve the purpose of objective description. This semantic exaggeration obscures historical continuities. Conflicts, dynamics of escalation, and power relations have not come into existence only since a supposed “new era”. The purpose of this framing is to suggest that there is no alternative, to downplay criticism, to obscure failures in peacekeeping, and it can contribute to paving the way for escalations or justifying them after the fact.

The present motion also employs the rhetorical device of conceptual misdirection.
The term “civil,” which serves as a clear distinction between warlike and non-warlike actions, is to be deleted, according to the proposers. It has been replaced by a string of self-evident declarations of peacefulness.

The civil clause reinforces academic freedom and the peace-oriented purpose of the Basic Law

Even though its legitimacy has been confirmed by legal scholars at numerous universities as well as by expert opinions from constitutional court justices, opponents of the civil clause are attempting to distort the terminology here as well. Yet the civil clause does not restrict academic freedom; rather, it protects it from economic dictates imposed by the financially powerful arms industry and opposes the exclusion of those students and employees who would otherwise be forced to choose against attending a publicly funded institution with active military ties. Those who wish to conduct arms research will find other institutions for that purpose. A public university is committed to the common good—to preserving a space where civilian research remains possible without pressure and without moral ambivalence.
We are currently witnessing an exorbitant expansion of the military sector—exceeding 1,000 billion euros—coupled with drastic cuts across all civilian and social sectors. At the same time, a military-academic complex is being established that leaves no room for research that does not promise benefits relevant to the arms industry; In Berlin and Hesse, cuts have been so severe that thousands of research and teaching positions will be eliminated and degree programs abolished in the coming years; at the same time, defense technical hubs are being expanded with the comprehensive integration of compatible and supportive academic departments. And the pressure is already being felt at the University of Kassel as well: According to the university’s own statements, the new Higher Education Pact means that up to 30 professorships will be eliminated in the coming years and building renovations will have to be put on hold.

It is this development that threatens academic freedom and artistic freedom.

We therefore urgently appeal to your conscience and sense of responsibility: On July 1, vote to preserve the original wording of the civil clause. Choose a university that does not follow the militarized spirit of the times, but has the courage to build rather than destroy and to draw a clear line: for open, civilian scholarship, for foresight, for discourse, for peaceful conflict resolution—so “so that only peace may emanate from German soil.”

Thank you very much,
CIVIL CLAUSE WORKING GROUP

At the University of Kassel, the Executive Board has, in recent years, established a political culture in which democratic participation is increasingly treated as an obstacle rather than a prerequisite for sound university policy.

Whether it’s development planning, personnel decisions, budget cuts, or, most recently, the amendment to the “civil clause”—the same pattern emerges time and again: debates are rushed under artificial time constraints, information is withheld, and decisions are prepared before the university community has even had the opportunity to form an informed opinion.

From the students’ perspective, this is a structural problem, perhaps even a tactic. The Executive Board does not use democratic bodies as forums for open decision-making, but rather as mechanisms for retroactively rubber-stamping decisions that have already been made. Criticism of the process is brushed aside, opposing viewpoints are ignored, and the actual scope for political maneuver is systematically narrowed.

Take the budget cuts, for example:

The distribution of budget cuts under the Higher Education Pact 2025 exemplifies how the Executive Board handles decisions regarding higher education policy. Although the Executive Board had the Senate approve a list of criteria, both the criteria and the specific budget-cutting plans were initially kept under wraps. Deans who passed this information on to their departments were even threatened with disciplinary action.

When the criteria were made public, it turned out that they were so subjective, numerous, and unweighted that they could have legitimized any possible decision. And the distribution of the cuts among the various departments was not made known until after they had already been signed and approved.

The voices of students and professors who opposed the process and the outcome were ignored, and even the student general assembly was used merely as a stage to portray the executive board’s decision as the only option.

Example: Vice President and Chancellor Election:

The same pattern is evident in important personnel decisions as well. In the election of the Vice President for Academic Affairs at the end of 2025, the student body, following its presentation to the FSK, voted by a majority against the designated candidate. Nevertheless, the by-election proceeded against the students’ wishes and without any opposing candidates.

The election of the Chancellor followed a similar course. After criticism arose regarding the mere confirmation of the Executive Board’s preferred candidate, the position was indeed advertised. However, the advertisement was posted for only the shortest possible period. In the end, the candidate favored by the Executive Board prevailed once again.

Example: The Civil Clause:

This undemocratic approach was most recently repeated in connection with the Presidium’s efforts to amend the civil clause. Although the issue is of great significance to students and the university, it was once again initially treated as confidential and delegated to a working group. A compilation based on the working group’s drafts was read aloud in the Senate. Only resistance from the Senate prevented this compilation from being put to a vote directly during the meeting. Instead, the draft—which still has not been distributed university-wide—is scheduled to be voted on at the upcoming Senate meeting.

Once again, the University Executive Board is attempting to keep the debate on issues relevant to the entire university as brief as possible and limited to the Senate.

---

Overall, the impression is that the university administration neither values nor respects student voices and wishes to limit the democratic participation of all other stakeholder groups to a minimum. During the discussions on budget cuts, President Ute Clement even stated that she did not wish to engage in an open debate on the issues of the university’s development and strategic direction associated with the budget cuts. Furthermore, she justified her failure to take student positions into account by arguing that she must also consider the voices of those who do not speak out.

The student body considers this understanding of democratic participation to be highly problematic. Invoking a supposedly silent majority is just as much a part of the repertoire of authoritarian political styles as shifting political decisions to non-transparent processes or instrumentalizing democratic bodies merely to legitimize decisions that have already been made.

We, as the student body, cannot accept that an authoritarian shift is taking place at our university. We therefore call on the Professors and the members of the Senate to counter this development:

Living democracy means more than simply rubber-stamping the Executive Board’s decisions. It means taking the time for open debates, bringing strategic and higher-education policy issues into the public discourse, and seriously weighing different positions against one another. It means developing our own visions for the future of the university, demanding their implementation, and critically monitoring the process. Above all, it means not hiding behind fabricated constraints or artificial time pressures.

Our appeal is directed equally at the Executive Board, the University Council, and the Ministry: Good university administration does not mean avoiding political debates. Rather, it means creating the organizational conditions necessary for democratic decision-making processes. That is precisely what is lacking at present. Instead, we are witnessing a culture in which political issues are kept to a minimum, while administrative procedures take up an ever-greater share of attention. This exhausts those who are committed to improving the university and hinders democratic participation. The result is not a more efficient university, but a poorer democratic culture and, ultimately, a worse university for everyone.

The Student Parliament of the University of Kassel reaffirms the importance of fair, respectful, and democratic competition in the context of the Student Parliament elections.

It calls on all candidate slates and their supporters to:

1. to conduct political debates in a factual and respectful manner,
2. to refrain from personal defamation and unwarranted attacks against political opponents,
3. not to damage, remove, cover up, or otherwise interfere with campaign materials from other slates,
4. to respect and protect equal opportunities for all slates running in the election,
5. not to offer gifts, food, or drinks in exchange for votes,
6. to uphold the secrecy of the ballot during campaign discussions,
7. to respect the neutrality of student councils and committees

In addition, the Parliament calls on the university administration and university employees to protect campaign materials of the university slates and to inform all employees of this responsibility.

The Student Parliament condemns any form of damage to, removal of, or manipulation of campaign materials and calls on all parties involved to conduct the remainder of the election campaign in the spirit of democratic fairness and mutual respect.

The Student Parliament calls on the Senate to hold the final vote on the civil clause only after the results of the [resolved] student referendum have been announced. Since the issue of the civil clause is not only a student achievement but also crucial to the culture at the University of Kassel, the Student Parliament believes the Senate must give special consideration to student voices.

The student body of the University of Kassel is critical of the efforts to reform the civil clause at the University of Kassel. In particular, we reject any form of repeal, softening or formulation of exceptions. Instead, we fully support the declaration of 11.07.2012, which emphasizes the academic responsibility and the mission of universities to promote peace and international understanding.

The idea that military research is becoming more legitimate in a world increasingly threatened by military conflicts is about as paradoxical as asking for better lighters during a forest fire. The civilian clauses in Germany and also in Kassel are not an expression of naivety drunk on peace, as is often claimed, but have arisen precisely from the experiences of the endless military destruction of the Second World War, the rearmament madness of the Cold War and the senseless military operations of the War on Terror.

History shows that armament in peacetime, including military research, has never stopped a war. On the contrary, many nations have been tempted into wars by their armament, which ultimately ruined them. A historical example is, of course, twice Germany. In this decade, both Russia and the USA are trying their hand at it.

And even if the military does not lead to wars, arms spending has often ruined countries economically. Here too, Germany, with the GDR, would be a good example. Wanting to profit from this tendency towards self-destruction is not realism, it is desperate cynicism. Arguing about it prevents us from actually working for a better and more sustainable world in which research and science are well funded for peaceful coexistence.

---

In the current discussion, it should also be noted that the underfunding at the University of Kassel is mainly limited to the arts, humanities, social sciences and cultural studies. The STEM faculties predominantly have sufficient third-party funding, which in turn often cannot be used to secure basic funding for teaching. More third-party funding is not the solution here.

It should also be noted that the next generation of students is demonstrating its courage and pacifism on a grand scale in its protest against compulsory military service and conscription. From our point of view, it makes sense for the University of Kassel to continue to present itself to these people as an institution of peace and to be there for all those who, for good reasons, do not want to join the Bundeswehr or Rheinmetall.

The University of Kassel sees itself as an international university, as a sustainable university, as a forge for the future. We want it to remain so, to continue to believe in a peaceful, sustainable future and to stand up for it. Especially with the city's past and the university location on a former armaments factory that was operated with forced labor and ultimately bombed, nothing else can be allowed.

We students don't want to study with the knowledge that the next seeker head will be built a few rooms away, which will then surprisingly launch its missile at a school after all. We don't want any Professors and employees to have to sign confidentiality agreements because their research is relevant to security; we want knowledge and research to remain free and open. And we don't want any fellow students to have to go and screw tanks after the lecture.

No amount of money from the arms industry can replace a clear conscience. We call on all members of the university, especially the members of the Senate and the University Presidential Board, to stand up for the civil clause in its current form and not to give up their belief in a peaceful world.

We also call on the University Board to stop inviting military organizations to job fairs.

The constituted student body as we have it today in Hesse and many other federal states is the result of more than half a century of political struggles by students. Co-determination in university affairs, the opportunity to support students and to campaign for a better student life are indispensable achievements.

It is essential to defend the constituted student body as a social space, as an incubator of civic and political engagement, as a means of student representation and the fight for student rights.

We, as representatives of Kassel students, oppose any attempts to restrict the rights of the constituted student bodies, be they of a political or legal nature. In the following, we formulate our legal opinion and call on all bodies of the student body to comply with it and to defend it in the event of conflict.

Legal opinion

The Student Parliament of the University of Kassel notes that the Hessian Higher Education Act in §84 (2) gives the student body extensive tasks and thus rights to represent its own members and to work for the welfare of the students in Kassel.

It is the legal opinion of the parliament that all political issues that directly affect the study and living conditions of students are also university policy issues. Parliament also states that cultural interests as well as social and economic concerns of students are not limited to the campus area.

Parliament also reserves the right to support small groups of students in exercising their civic responsibility for the values of our constitution as part of the promotion of a sense of civic responsibility, without necessarily making common cause in terms of content.

As the highest elected body of the student body, the parliament sees it as its task and authority to assess whether an issue has sufficient relevance and benefit for the student body, demonstrates civic responsibility or contributes sufficiently to political education or cultural interests. It refuses to draw any legal boundaries, with the exception of cases in which no student connection can really be established.

Work order:

Parliament calls on all office holders of the student body, in particular the members of the AStA, the Council of Elders and the Stupa Presidium, to protect the rights of the student body, in particular its legislative body, whenever possible.

The AStA is explicitly called upon to consistently represent the legal opinion described above in the event of a conflict.

Should the legal supervision of the university and/or the student body deviate unwaveringly from the legal opinion of the parliament, the AStA is requested to describe the case to the parliament and to obtain authorization to disregard any instructions that are contrary to the legal opinion of the parliament. It is thus also called upon to defend the rights of Parliament at the next higher legal level in case of doubt.

Parliament is tasked with averting harm to the student body and defending the rights of its members and the legislature.

The student parliament of the University of Kassel is firmly opposed to the attack on the constituted student bodies in Saxony-Anhalt and condemns the attempt by the AfD parliamentary group in the Saxony-Anhalt state parliament to dismantle democratic structures of student self-administration. It supports the calls to reject the AfD parliamentary group's motion, declares its solidarity with local student representatives and clearly advocates the preservation of democratic self-administration at universities.

Even though the motion was debated and rejected in the state parliament on May 20, 2026, the initiative remains a highly problematic signal. Anyone who attacks constituted student bodies is not just attacking a formality of university policy, but the basis for collective self-organization, democratic co-determination and solidarity-based representation of students' interests. Such advances are part of an authoritarian agenda that seeks to depoliticize the university and weaken democratic dissenting voices.

The student parliament clearly rejects such attacks. It calls on democratic forces not to give in to anti-constitutional efforts, but to oppose them with a clear headwind, solidarity and a determined defense of student self-administration. The debate on the motion by the AfD parliamentary group in Saxony-Anhalt shows that attacks on constituted student bodies are not a marginal issue, but a direct attack on democratic co-determination at universities. Even the rejection in the state parliament does not change the fact that this initiative reveals a clear objective: student self-administration is to be delegitimized, weakened and, in case of doubt, eradicated.

This is precisely why a clear, solidary and political response is needed. The student body must not meet such attacks with silence, but must make it clear that it stands on the side of democratic, self-governing and solidary university structures.

I. Motion Resolution

On the basis of II.

1. the introduction of free attempts for failed exams of Iranian
   students, as well as urgently
2. the postponement of the deadline for the semester fee to be transferred.

II. justification

A total of 200 Iranian students are studying at the University of Kassel, who have a long way to go to obtain their student visa: bureaucratic hurdles, high financial requirements and a general uncertainty about their visa status that lasts for several months. Many of those who have managed to complete this process have a tight schedule here in Kassel: Studying at the university, possibly attending German courses (very many already learned German very well in Iran) and working. Like all international students, Iranian students also have difficulties gaining access to the job market. Despite excellent German language skills and years of work experience, they receive multiple rejections. This increases the financial pressure enormously. Iranian students, like all other international students, must be able to prove that they have at least €12,000 in their bank account. In order to pay rent, living costs and the semester fee and still keep the €12,000 in the account, a job is urgently needed.

Many travel to Iran during the semester break to bring cash from their parents back to Germany. Many also receive money from their parents in Iran via detours if they get into financial difficulties here in Germany. Due to the strong sanctions imposed by the West on the Islamic Republic of Iran, money transfers between banks cannot be carried out as usual and require complicated solutions.
The current war against Iran is putting the situation of Iranian students here in Germany, and therefore also in Kassel, at great risk.

They have been struggling with fears for their families since December 2025, which came to a head in January at the latest: after several protests by the Iranian population, there was a massacre of the Iranian population by the regime of the Islamic Republic over two days, in which around 50,000 people were murdered. There was also an internet shutdown at the time, which, after being briefly lifted, has continued since the start of the war on 28.02.2026 until now. In addition to the particularly poor psychological and mental health of Iranian students, they are plagued by the fear of financial hardship here in Kassel: those who are financially dependent on their families in Iran no longer have the opportunity to communicate with them and receive money, while many among them have still not been able to find a job to meet the financial requirements. The students also often felt unable to cope with their busy daily lives. The consequences: they earned less money or even lost their jobs.

Their questions: How do I pay the running costs of living? How do I pay the semester contribution? How do I keep the €12,000 in my account so that I can continue to study and live in Kassel?

In addition to the financial pressure, the student pressure to perform also increased: the
deterioration in performance due to the massive psychological and mental stress had an impact on the exams in February: Many failed their exams. This caused further anxiety due to the high requirements of the immigration authorities regarding the ECTS points to be earned in order to remain a student in Kassel.

At the end of January, students were made aware of the Studierendenwerk's social counseling service and the emergency fund, and this was also brought to our attention when we spoke to the Senate in February. However, after several students visited the service, they were told that they could not be helped with their concerns.

The Iranian students therefore lost confidence in possible help and support from their university, which further worsened their situation.

On the basis of these described study conditions of the Iranian students, we urgently request that you take note of the demands described in I.

There is currently no
reliable selection of halal-certified food in the canteens and cafeterias of the Studierendenwerk Kassel, which severely restricts students who follow Islamic dietary regulations.

The student parliament of the University of Kassel calls on the Studierendenwerk Kassel to

1. to offer a regular selection of halal-certified meals in the canteens and
   cafeterias of the University of Kassel,
2. to provide transparent labeling of these meals in the menus (online and on site),
3. and to ensure that the procurement, preparation and labeling comply with the recognized standards for halal certification.

The Main Committee notes that rising living costs are an increasing burden for many students and have a direct impact on study conditions.
It calls on the university management as well as the Studierendenwerk and the state government to examine and implement measures within the scope of their possibilities to relieve the financial burden on students in their everyday lives.

These include in particular

• Ensuring affordable offers in the area of catering
• examining further support offers for students in financially stressful situations
• as well as improving the transparency of existing support and
  counseling services

1. The Student Parliament declares its solidarity with the people in Iran who have been protesting against economic hardship, social inequality and political repression throughout the country since the end of December 2025, demanding human rights, freedom, self-determination and fundamental political and economic change.
2. The Student Parliament expresses its special solidarity with the students in Iran, who are playing a central role in the current protest movements and who are campaigning for democratic rights, freedom of education and social participation at great personal risk.
3. The Student Parliament expresses its solidarity with the Iranian students and other Iranian members of the University of Kassel and recognizes that many of them are under great emotional, familial and psychological strain as a result of the current situation in Iran.
4. The Student Parliament condemns the violent repression against the protests in Iran, in particular the use of firearms, arbitrary arrests and the deliberate and intentional shutdown of the Internet to suppress information, expression of opinion and civil society mobilization.

The Student Parliament expressly welcomes and supports the fact that, within the framework of the existing responsibilities of the General Students' Committee, reference is made to existing counseling, support and contact services for affected students and that these are made visible.

Ideology does not always have to be obvious, but it can still have an effect. A good example of this is the movie "Die Feuerzangenbowle", which was made in 1944, during the National Socialist era. In recent years, it has been shown several times on our campus by the "Uniparty" group without a historically critical classification. Unreflected screenings of the film have already been criticized by various bodies, including student representatives from other cities, representatives of academia and the Anne-Frank educational institution.

As elected student representatives, we therefore call on the initiative to refrain from showing the film without further reflection in the context of a professional critical classification.

Student assistants make an indispensable contribution to research, teaching and support at the University of Kassel. At the same time, their employment contracts are often temporary, with short hours, short-term contracts or changing areas of work. In the run-up to the 2026 collective bargaining and pay round, the GEW Hessen trade union made it clear that a binding collective agreement for student assistants is needed at universities in Hessen. The contractual agreement (SV) with 10 hours per week and a minimum contract term of one year etc. is an important milestone, but not yet a collective agreement. It has been shown that the universities do not adhere to the SV.

The new Hessian Higher Education Pact 2026-2031 was signed on July 17, 2025 and will come into force on January 1, 2026. This pact will result in significant savings requirements for the University of Kassel: The university is forecasting a structural deficit of around €14 million per year from 2026 and is planning to not fill or not fully fill positions in administration, central facilities and departments. These cost-cutting and consolidation measures also threaten to directly endanger the employment relationships of auxiliary staff: If permanent positions are not refilled or are reduced, the work and employment situation of student assistants tends to deteriorate.

The StuPa and AStA have already expressed their solidarity with student assistants in the past: For example, the Senate of the University of Kassel, together with the University Council, has been critical of the underfunding and the consequences for employees - and the student representatives have been involved in protest actions against the cutback plans.

Against this background, the student self- and co-administration has a special responsibility to actively campaign for fair working and employment conditions for student assistants at an early stage, especially in the area of conflict between collective bargaining for student assistants and the blanket savings constraints imposed by the Higher Education Pact. Therefore, the Student Parliament and the General Students' Committee resolve:

1. 
   We declare our solidarity with the nationwide TVStud initiative and support it and the unions in the demands they will put forward for the collective bargaining round: Student assistants should
   1. receive a collective agreement which, among other things, provides for a regulated scope of employment, a minimum contract term and largely permanent/supported employment;
   2. be integrated into a reliable and transparent personnel structure - particularly in the context of the consolidation measures triggered by the Higher Education Pact;
   3. not be used as a "substitute variable" for cost-cutting measures within the framework of the Higher Education Pact, i.e. job cuts or non-replacements must not be at the expense of student assistants.
2. 
   The AStA is authorized to actively represent the interests of
   student assistants in the upcoming negotiations for the 2026 collective bargaining
   and salary round for the state of Hesse. This includes in particular
   1. Public relations work among student assistants at the University of Kassel - informing them about their rights, inviting them to participate in the TVStud initiative, mobilizing them to sign
      declarations of intent to take action;
   2. Convening and co-organizing information and action events together with the TVStud initiative, ver.di and other trade unions that support student assistants
      to discuss current negotiations, employment conditions and the situation at the University of Kassel
      in the context of the Higher Education Pact;
   3. Calls for participation - if necessary - in supporting actions by student assistants in order to represent a strong student voice to the university management together with trade unions such as GEW or ver.di;
   4. Further cooperation with the TVStud initiative, with trade unions and with the student assistants' group at the University of Kassel (e.g. via the University of Kassel Assistants' Council) to ensure a high level of participation and visibility.
3. The student body's communication channels (website, social media, notices) should be used to report on the employment situation of student assistants, the status of collective bargaining and the effects of the Higher Education Pact on working and study conditions and to encourage assistants to actively participate.
4. We call on the university management of the University of Kassel and the state of Hesse to prioritize the employment and working conditions of student assistants within the framework of the Higher Education Pact. In particular, we demand
   1. a transparent presentation of the departments in which job cuts or non-replacements are planned and with what consequences for student assistants;
   2. that the vulnerable groups - in particular student assistants - do not bear the brunt of any cost-cutting and consolidation measures;
   3. that alternative consolidation strategies are adopted (e.g. reduction of administration, bundling of areas, no new hires at central facilities) and not primarily via flexible auxiliary staff employment relationships;
   4. that the medium-term financial planning of the University of Kassel explicitly takes into account the employment security of auxiliary staff - especially in view of the forecast deficit of approx. 14 million euros per year.
5. StuPa and AStA reserve the right to carry out public relations and action work together with the auxiliary staff structures of the University of Kassel and trade unions in the event of concrete indications of violations of the employment rights of student assistants (e.g. undercutting of the number of hours, chain limitation, failure to fill positions that were assigned to assistants).

At the latest since the university management agreed to the Higher Education Pact this summer, it has been clear that the University of Kassel must make structural savings and thus shrink. However, the handling of this need for savings is non-transparent and unconstructive, especially in the way it is distributed among the departments.

Other universities in Hessen have taken the impending cuts as an opportunity to start an open, broad exchange about their future and orientation as well as the resulting structural changes. The University of Kassel, which is particularly affected by the decline in student numbers and whose strategy papers are often enough still characterized by the growth ideas of the 00s, should also face up to these questions about the future and start an open exchange, also with the students.

Instead, the Presidential Board of the University of Kassel is trying to administer the cuts without any major discourse and without changing the strategic planning. To this end, the Executive Board has agreed with the Senate on 17 criteria for the distribution of cuts in the departments, but without a weighting key or a transparent presentation of the application in the departments.

Although the Senate approved the original list of criteria, the actual distribution of cuts is not democratically legitimized, but negotiated solely between the Executive Board and the deaneries. In these discussions, different criteria are weighted differently in different departments. The result is a non-transparent and undemocratic distribution of cuts, which gives the impression that the focus is less on strategic plans than on personal favors and the smallest possible resistance.

After three months of negotiations between department heads and the Presidential Board, the information available to us as students paints a picture that can only be described as chaotic. Departments with stable student numbers sometimes have to make more cuts than those with a sharp decline, while at the same time traditional courses of study that are important to Kassel are being cut, while any popular subjects are being retained. From a student perspective, it is particularly questionable that professorships that are in high demand by students are not to be filled, while empty shells are retained because they are considered prestigious by the university.

As the student body of the University of Kassel, the way our university management is dealing with the cuts is unacceptable, neither in the process nor in the result. The distribution that has resulted from the Executive Board's attempt to draw up a cuts plan without major discussions reflects more the power relations within the Professor body than a strategic plan for the University of Kassel. We therefore call on the university management to make the distribution of the cuts and the application of the decided criteria fully transparent and to start a second, this time university-wide discussion on how to deal with the cuts. In our view, it is essential that student perspectives are given greater consideration in this process.

If this does not happen, and the procedure remains non-transparent and problematic for us students, we call on the HMWK to review the university management's handling of the cuts with regard to their customary and sensible nature as part of a supervisory complaint.