Following the two introductory posts, we present a series of 9 blogposts.

We start with a brief presentation of the pioneering work of the Flemish universities in this field. Ghent University adopted a human rights screening policy in 2017, and in 2019 a similar policy was adopted by the umbrella organisation of the five Flemish universities.

Two posts by Edouard Delruelle and Julie Delvaux of Liège University explain the screening system in place at that university in the French speaking part of Belgium. In addition, the authors engage with the tension between academic freedom and institutional responsibility that characterizes the debate on human rights screening by universities.

The post by the Advisory Commission on Collaborations of Nijmegen University likewise situates the ‘Nijmegen approach’ in relation to academic freedom, balancing the latter with scientific integrity as well as human rights.

At Technical University Delft, the screening mechanism takes the form of a ‘permanent moral deliberation chamber’. This original model is presented in a post by three representatives of that university, Mark Theunissen, Ibo van de Poel, and Marcus Westberg.

Two posts by Evelyne Schmid analyse the key discussion points in the work of a working group at Lausanne University, that was set up to reflect on a framework that would screen external collaborations from the point of view of ethics, scientific integrity, international law and academic freedom. These concern the complex interactions between academic freedom and responsibility, ethics and human rights.

A post by Carlo Mazzoleni  of Roma’s Sapienza University sketches the situation at Italian universities, some of which have suspended collaborations with Israeli partners, yet these seem ad hoc measures that were adopted under strong pressure. Mazzoleni argues for a more systematic screening process.

The series concludes with a reflection by Aleydis Nissen of Hasselt University about the ethical implications for a university of engaging with these types of questions. According to Nissen, a university that makes an ethical assessment of a partner, implicitly yet importantly also examines itself.

Together, these posts aim in the first place to inform about what we see as an important new development in human rights responsibility and self-regulation. In addition, the blogposts report on some of the challenges these screening models encounter, and engage with some of the key debates surrounding them.