The Leiden IV 2013, from the 22nd to the 23rd of March brought together 53 teams (including teams from DK Wien, Berlin Debating Union and Tilbury House), competing against one another in a pleasant atmosphere, which can be attributed to the formidable organizational effort of the convenors, as well as the social and open-minded attitude of the mostly Dutch contestants. The location of Leiden certainly also played a part though. It can justly be described as an idyllic small university town, perpetuating Dutch stereotypes, concerning their generally friendly and tolerant attitude and a heavy, widespread use of bicycles.

The tournament consisted of 5 preliminary rounds, followed by the break to the semi-and novice finals. The motions all had in common, that they placed a rather strong burden on the government in defining the respective motions. The debates tended to be dominated by a difficulty of explaining and restricting key terms used in the motions. When exactly can we speak of a gang? What exactly is meant by re-ratification and what constitutes an international treaty? What exactly is espionage? Seemingly trivial questions as these, presented a great burden on the government’s side, in setting the bounds and building a solid foundation for the ensuing debates. These burdens were especially difficult to fulfil and shortcomings in the definitions tended to be especially devastating for government teams in this tournament.

The topics up for debate included international politics, our justice system, the role of the media, multiculturalism and civil rights.

The exact motions were as follows:

1. THW Criminalize Gang Membership

2. THBT Adoption Agencies Should Seek to Place Children in Families with a Similar Culture to those of their Biological Parents

3. THW require re-ratification of all international treaties, including the EU, by popular referendum every decade

4. THBT the International Community Should Treat Espionage as a Justification for Military Retaliation

5. THBT the news media should also represent the criminal’s point of view when reporting on criminal convictions

Semi and novice finals: (Infoslide: Some people believe that they were born LGBT, some LGBT people believe that it is a choice that they made. Currently, the LGBT movement uses being “born this way” as a way of legitimizing equal rights.) THBT the LGBT rights movement should abandon the “born this way” campaign.

Final: In times of war, THBT relatives of civilians killed by the military occupation, should be able to sue the soldiers responsible for their relative’s death in civilian court.

In the final debated: Niels Schröter & Hauke Blume (Berlin Debating Union), Arielle Dundas & Tomas Beerthuis (Utrecht Debating Society A), Alex Klein & Heleen van t‘ Spijker (UDS B), Micha Beekman & Caspar Jacobs (Bonaparte/ Belarus). Micha and Jacob won the tournemant. Best speaker became Wen-Yu Weng.

The Tab can be found here. CA-Team consisted of Karin Merckens, Sella Nevo, Marlena Valles. 

The Leiden Open first originated as a Dutch tournament in 2005, then called “De Leidsch Open”. The first edition was won by the Utrecht Debating Society.  In 2006 this tournament received both an international follow-up, and another Dutch-language tournament dubbed “De Leidsche Herfscht”. In 2010 the Leiden Open received the stature of “Nederlands Kampioenschap Debatteren” (The Dutch national championship). It was the first Nationals to be held in BP, and immediatedly became the largest-ever Nationals.

Calyxx Peucker/ ak