University Invalidates Thesis of Dutch Politician

Last week, Erasmus University Rotterdam declared Vicky Maeijer’s master’s thesis invalid. This sets the stage for her to lose her degree at the school, which Maeijer hopes to avoid.

Maeijer is the current State Secretary for Long-term and Social Care. She previously served as a Member of the Dutch House of Representatives and the European Parliament.

The allegations were first made public in November 2024 by Eric van den Berg, Lisanne Wichgers and Phoenix Wall at BNR. They discovered that over half of her 69-page thesis had been copied almost verbatim from various sources.

Days later, the university announced that it would investigate the allegations. Now, it appears that the investigation is complete, and the school has found that the thesis is invalid.

Maeijer, for her part, did not deny the plagiarism or argue with the school’s findings. Instead, she said that she had made “major mistakes” and they “should never have happened.”

She also said she hopes to work with the school to resubmit her thesis so she can complete her studies “in the way I always intended.”

The school has not commented on whether that will be possible.

In the end, it’s a relatively peaceful story. However, that’s precisely what makes it so unique.

Understanding the Allegations

Disclosure: The allegations and much of the coverage are in Dutch. As such, I’ve used automatic translation tools to gather information. I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the translations.

The allegations are relatively straightforward. According to the original BNR report, Maeijer copied approximately 56% of her thesis from outside sources.

To be clear, this doesn’t mean that all the copied text was plagiarism. According to the original reporting, roughly 24% of the thesis was from legal texts, standard formulations, or correctly quoted. However, that still left 32% copied from various scientific papers and other sources found online.

Though Maeijer cited most of the sources in her references, there was no indication of quoting.

Back in November, there was some debate about whether this constituted plagiarism. In an article for the NL Times, Gijs van Oenen, chairman of the Rotterdam examination committee for philosophy, did not feel it crossed the line. He said that while she copied most of the thesis, much of the text had no “claim of originality.”

However, most, including the university, disagreed with that viewpoint. This wasn’t a case of a few passages being too close to the source; Maeijer copied over half of the paper, with nearly one-third being deeply problematic.

Because of that, the school ruled that the thesis was invalid. Without the thesis, Maeijer will lose her degree. However, she hopes to earn it back by completing a new thesis. Whether the school will allow that is another question.

Why This Case Stands Out

Over the past year and a half, countless headlines have featured politically targeted academic plagiarism scandals. Most in the United States targeted black academics or others supporting Diversity, Equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. While the allegations varied wildly, even the more serious ones didn’t receive much attention.

This is understandable. Schools do not want to entertain plagiarism allegations that they see as made in bad faith.

To be clear, I don’t know if BNR’s original reporting was politically motivated. However, Europe has a lengthy history of high-ranking officials facing similar plagiarism allegations. But, such allegations are rarely meaningful until after the school revokes the degree.

It has been the difference between resigning in shame or becoming a President of the European Union.

However, this case might shake out differently. Maeijer is leaning into the issue. Rather than begrudgingly accepting the school’s findings, she’s acknowledging the issues and, according to her, seeking a way to repair them.

While calling this amount of copied text a “mistake” trivializes a very serious issue, it’s at least an acknowledgment of wrongdoing. As we saw in February, politicians tend to fare much better when they get ahead of these allegations.

It will be worth watching to see what, if anything, happens next.

Bottom Line

Much about this case is familiar. A political figure who published their thesis during the dark ages of academic plagiarism is accused of committing plagiarism in it. Though the volume of plagiarized content is higher than in most similar cases, it is still a common refrain.

However, it stands out for three reasons. First, the school took the allegations seriously and conducted a thorough investigation. Second, it ruled against Maeijer, invalidating the thesis. Third, Maeijer is not disputing the findings but, instead, hoping to find a way to rectify the issue.

My issue with weaponizing plagiarism has long been that it cheapens plagiarism as an offense and that the accusers have no interest in correcting the academic record, only in punishing the accused.

However, it’s unclear whether this is a case of weaponizing plagiarism. The allegations have more merit, and a media outlet discovered them rather than receiving a tip about them. The school also took it more seriously, launching an investigation almost immediately.

It will be interesting to watch how this case unfolds over the coming weeks.