When it was announced that Camiel Eurlings had received a certificate of good conduct, despite his transaction with the OM, some surprise was noticeable in the media.

Yet this issue was not so surprising as a board member of the NOC*NSF is not a political office holder, for whom, partly because of an exemplary function, a specific screening profile applies with higher integrity requirements. He is only subject to a general screening profile, with at most relevance whether there would be a risk to society if the misconduct were to be repeated in the workplace. That was not obvious.

Yet, the issue falters somewhat as the NOC*NSF is an important institution whose board members can be held up as role models. May they be discredited for compromising behaviour?

This question is all the more pressing because the NOC*NSF is an Institution for General Benefit (ANBI). Having ANBI status brings with it a number of advantages, such as enjoying tax benefits. But before an association can be designated as an ANBI, it must meet a number of requirements, including an integrity test. If an ANBI does not disassociate itself from a director or a high-profile person who has been irrevocably convicted of the use of violence in the past four years, the ANBI status may be revoked.

It can certainly be said of board member Eurlings that he is also a high-profile figure for the NOC*NSF who has been linked to the use of violence in the past four years. But with no irrevocable conviction but 'only' a transaction, the ANBI status of the NOC*NSF is not at risk. If NOC*NSF board members should be of impeccable conduct because of their exemplary role, the NOC*NSF would have to tighten its statutes. Or the government should do so with the integrity test of an ANBI.

The downside of that is that you also exclude people who have had a down period in their lives but have found their way back up. You could even see the VOG issue to Eurlings as a positive example for people with judicial documentation. This case shows that they need not let a 'criminal record' discourage them from entering the labour market. The VOG assessment only looks at the past to a limited extent. If they are imbued with that message, it will be a win for society.

Mr. D.M. Penn