Jip Stam
External PhD Candidate
- Name
- Mr.drs. J. Stam
- Telephone
- 071 5276360
- j.stam@law.leidenuniv.nl
- ORCID iD
- 0000-0002-3926-6610
Jip Stam (1993) graduated in political science and jurisprudence and philosophy of law at Leiden University (both cum laude) and is an external PhD candidate at the department of Jurisprudence. His academic interests mainly focus on legal theory, political philosophy and constitutional law.
More information about Jip Stam
Jip's doctoral research concerns the use of criminal law to restrict freedom of expression in public debate,a topic that has been the subject of both societal and academic interest since the conviction of politician Geert Wilders in 2020. A notable aspect of this case is that it applied a consideration by the Dutch Supreme Court in which repressive action against 'hate speech' – criminalised in the Netherlands as group defamation (Article 137c of the Criminal Code) and incitement to hatred or discrimination (Article 137d of the Criminal Code) – is considered a matter of liberal-democratic self-defence. Specifically, the central question is whether statements made by politicians “incite intolerance”. By applying the Articles 137c and 137d in this way, these provisions have become more than just offences against public order; they have also acquired a function in a constitutional doctrine that aims to protect the liberal democratic constitution as such.
In his thesis, Jip examines how this doctrine has become part of the relevant European and Dutch case law and attempts to explain its origins from various legal theory perspectives. This reveals that weighing up the importance of combating hate speech against the protection of freedom of expression as a matter of liberal democratic self-defence or the paradox of tolerance is, on the one hand, a logical development but, on the other hand, also entails major risks that could undermine liberal democracy as well. To substantiate this thesis, Jip uses various theories, including the theory of constitutional development of Wim Couwenberg (1926-2019). This theory offers a number of starting points for explaining and assessing the turbulent development of the tension that arises from the application of criminal provisions.
The (translated) title of the thesis is “Freedom of speech and the suppression of discrimination in the Netherlands: a constitutional-developmental approach” and will be defended by Jip on 12 November 2025 at 2.30 p.m. in the Grand Auditorium of the Academy Building.
External PhD Candidate
- Faculty of Law
- Inst Interdisciplinary Study of the Law
- Jurisprudence
- Stam J. (12 November 2025), Vrijheid van meningsuiting en de bestrijding van discriminatie in Nederland: een constitutioneel ontwikkelingsperspectief [Freedom of speech and the suppression of discrimination in the Netherlands: a constitutional-developmental approach] (Dissertatie. Instituut voor Metajuridica, Faculteit Rechtsgeleerdheid, Leiden University). Supervisor(s) and Co-supervisor(s): Ellian A., Rijpkema B.R.
- Molier G., Rijpkema B.R. & Stam J. (2024), Militant democracy, hate speech and 'inciting intolerance': politician Geert Wilders before the Supreme Court in the Netherlands. In: Doomen J., Ellian A. & Molier G. (Eds.), Law and Morality Revisited. Den Haag: Boom. 441-458.
- Stam J. (2024), Hate speech, tolerance and constitutional development. In: Doomen J., Ellian A. & Molier G. (Eds.), Law and morality revisited. The Hague: Boom. 25-48.
- Stam J. (22 June 2022), Een parlementaire gevaarzettingsdoctrine is een heilloze weg. Nederland Rechtsstaat. [blog entry].
- Stam J. (2022), Senaatsvoorzitter Bruijn zet parlementaire immuniteit op de helling, Elsevier Weekblad : .
- Ellian A. & Stam J. (2022), Artikel 71. Parlementaire immuniteit: De parlementaire immuniteit: brandpunt van de constitutionele dynamiek (artikel 71 Grondwet). In: Ellian A. & Rijpkema B.R. (Eds.), Een nieuw commentaar op de Grondwet. Amsterdam: Boom. 340-354.
- Stam J. (2021), Kritiek op de rechtsstaat is niet altijd onrechtsstatelijk, Elsevier Weekblad EW Podium: .
- Stam J. (2021), De cultuur en structuur van de tegenmacht, Elsevier Weekblad EW Podium: .
- Stam J. (2021), Mogen ze nu meer of minder zeggen?: Over de wankele positie van volksvertegenwoordigers met betrekking tot de vrijheid van meningsuiting. In: Jansen R.H.T., Polanen T.A. van, Sander D.B. & Sijtsma P.M. (Eds.), Trouble in de trias: Bijdragen over de verhoudingen tussen de Nederlandse staatsmachten. Nijmegen: Ars Aequi Libri. 143-148.
- Molier G., Rijpkema B.R. & Stam J. (2021), Wilders II: Het onverdraagzaamheidscriterium toegepast door de Hoge Raad: of hoe de weerbare democratie het strafrecht binnentreedt, Nederlands Juristenblad 96(42): 3462-3470 (NJB 2021/3094).
- Stam J. (2020), Mogen ze nu meer of minder zeggen? Over de wankele positie van volksvertegenwoordigers met betrekking tot de vrijheid van meningsuiting, Ars Aequi 69(6): 524-525.
- Stam J. (2020), Moet de strafrechter ook de scheidsrechter zijn van het publieke debat? De scheiding der machten in het licht van de vrijheid van meningsuiting voor volksvertegenwoordigers: De scheiding der machten in het licht van de vrijheid van meningsuiting voor volksvertegenwoordigers, Netherlands Journal of Legal Philosophy 49(2): 149-178.
- Stam J. (2020), Het onveilige vaarwater van het publieke debat, Joop.nl : .
- Stam J. (18 May 2020), Een opmerkelijke vergelijking tussen Joden en Marokkanen. Bij Nader Inzien. [blog entry].
- Stam J. (13 September 2019), The risky aspects of our hate speech laws. Leiden Law Blog. [blog entry].
- Stam J. (2017), Leve de onafhankelijke geesten: Waarom individueel mandaat van parlementariërs de democratie weerbaarder maakt, Liberale Reflecties 58(1): 15-22.
- Stam J. (2017), Anti-discriminatie, democratie en legaliteit. De ongelukkige botsing tussen anti-discriminatiebepalingen uit de Nederlandse strafwet en de beginselen van de democratische rechtsstaat, Liberale Reflecties 58(2): 117-125.