were expected to perform any tasks which they could not reasonably be expected to perform. 4.3 The inquiry was conducted by a three-member Committee known as the Boekraad Committee, which concluded that there was no systematic institutional discrimination directed against ethnic minority students within the NPA. However, it also concluded that the NPA did not as yet provide truly multicultural education and that the policy intended to achieve this aim was flawed. The Committee made 14 recommendations intended to put in place a genuinely multicultural education. Recommendation 4 envisaged the appointment of a special committee of external experts who would examine the individual cases of a number of ethnic minority students whose studies had stagnated. The Committee on the Progress of Ethnic Minority Students (SAS) was set up to this effect. 4.4 The SAS Committee reported its findings to the Minister of the Interior on 30 August 1995, making recommendations on the cases of the nine students it had looked into. Out of them, three eventually completed the course, one would graduate within that year, two were appointed elsewhere through an outplacement procedure, two availed themselves of a benefit scheme and one was involved in legal proceedings concerning the question of whether or not he had suffered any loss of income because of his failure to complete the course. 4.5 The author was born in Suriname and has lived in the Netherlands for many years. Prior to his studies at the NPA, he had attended a course of higher professional education at the School of Social Work, after which he worked as a teacher. He entered the NPA on 20 August 1991, having passed through a selection procedure that deviated only in a few minor details from the regular entry process for students of Dutch origin. His admission meant that, at the same time as being a student he was a public servant employed on a temporary contract by the Minister of the Interior. 4.6 On 6 July 1992, at the end of his first year at the NPA, the author was informed by the secretary of the Examining Board that he would not be admitted to the second year, as his results were unsatisfactory. Indeed, his results were such that he could have been expelled from the NPA. However, he was given the opportunity to repeat the first year. At that point, the author did not complain about any discriminatory attitudes within the NPA, either regarding himself or his fellow students. At the end of the second year, the author's results were again so poor that the teaching staff designated him a "discussion case". As he had been absent (due to illness) and had therefore not taken all the necessary examinations, the NPA decided to give him another opportunity to sit them. To effect this decision, the Director of the NPA invited the author to a meeting in order to discuss and evaluate his results.