Biblioteket tar saka #librarycase

Tomorrow, January 20, there will be a «IFLA/UNESCO Public Library Manifesto Webinar». The Manifesto in question has been translated and circulated in many languages. It is a fundamental text on the desired role of public libraries in this world, and a tool for librarians everywhere to explain to governments and people why public libraries are needed and should be further developed.

>> It seems that the webinar will be mostly about Scandinavian librarians’ work with the IFLA/UNESCO Manifesto, and will proceed partly in Swedish and Norwegian.

We, the bloggers at BiblioteketTarSaka*, intend to participate in the webinar. To get straight to the point, we are concerned about how one wording in the manifesto has changed over the years. It is unclear if we will have the opportunity to explain our concern during the webinar. But in any case, we hope to include something like the following in the webinar chat.

By Mikael Böök, Isnäs, Finland

In this writing I demand a paradigm shift or revolt. Or maybe not paradigm shift, because I want to show that IFLA and libraries have a great potential. But which is not used.

No, do not abandon all hope! You who enter here, remember that «our vision is a strong and united library field powering literate, informed and participative societies.»

The inscription at the gate to IFLA’s own vault on the World Wide Web – quoted in italics above – inspires to some further thoughts on the current crisis of of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions.

First, however, some words about the special issue that Biblioteksbladet, the journal of the Swedish Library Association has published about the situation within IFLA.

Information has hitherto not been easy to obtain from IFLA itself, and neither have other sources of the international library community been keen on throwing light on it. Biblioteksbladet has already for some time been an exception, that is, for those who read Swedish. However, this changed at the end of last month when the journal attempted a synthesis, in English, of what has happened within IFLA. Their special issue in English is found here.

The special IFLA-issue of Biblioteksbladet is warmly recommended reading for library staff around the world. To begin with, it features a piece called «Fear. Illness. Silence», based on a fact finding mission to The Hague (where IFLA’s headquarters are located) by Lisa Bjurwald. This is a decent journalistic job that serves the uninitiated as a valuable introduction while …

By Mikael Böök, Isnäs, Finland

On 4 March this year, IFLA’s Governing Board decided to terminate the organisation’s contract with its Secretary General, Gerald Leitner. The decision was prompted by complaints from staff at IFLA’s  headquarters in The Hague. Exactly what the complaints were about we do not know, but the Governing Board has stated that it could no longer have confidence in Leitner’s leadership style. There has been rumors  of excessive hotel bills and harassment of staff, for example, but the Board has refused to go into details for legal reasons as the matter of Leitner’s dismissal is due to be heard by a Dutch court (at the earliest) in October 2022.

Leitner assumed the post of Secretary General of IFLA in June 2016 and was responsible for IFLA’s strategic and operational management and financial administration. His contribution to the development of the Library Federation has without doubt been significant. In 2017, Leitner initiated IFLA’s Global Vision project, which took the form of an online survey in 216 countries and was called «a conversation across the global library field». The aim of the project was to develop a shared strategic vision for the world’s librarians and libraries. This resulted in the strategy document «IFLA Strategy 2019-2024» (available for download here in 15 different languages.)

Already from the above brief description, anyone could conclude that IFLA is currently going through a crisis. How deep is the crisis?  Obviously,  the answer  will depend on the degree of  the observer’s loyalty  to the Governing Board of the organisation. But then it is not just a question of whether the Board did right or wrong in dismissing Leitner. Leitner’s management alone …