Goethe, acutely aware of the threatening impossibility of all human relationships in emergent industrial society, sought to present tact in the Wilhelm Meister novels as the saving accommodation between alienated human beings. Continue reading →

We, the undersigned, condemn the decision by the University of Cambridge to suspend a student from the university for two and half years for his part in a peaceful protest against the government’s higher education policy.

Universities should be a place of critical thinking and open debate. Academics and students must be free to share ideas and think seriously about the world in which we live. The suspension of this student sets a dangerous precedent, which threatens to stifle debate within our academic institutions.

We believe, irrespective of individual opinions on the action itself, that this exemplary sentence undermines the University’s professed commitment to freedom of speech and the right to protest.

We call for the suspended student to be reinstated with immediate effect.

Continue reading →

This morning hundreds of students and staff silently protested outside Lord Sainsbury’s installation as Chancellor of the University of Cambridge. Dressed in gowns and academic dress, the students and staff stood with banners outside the Senate House with duct tape over their mouths in protest at the two and a half year suspension of PhD student Owen Holland. Holland was suspended for seven terms for reading a poem in protest at a speech by David Willets, Minister for Universities and Science. The protest was called by CUSU (Cambridge University Student Union) President Gerard Tully. [1]

Lord Sainsbury was elected Chancellor of the University last October. His installation was attended by many of the senior members of the University. A representative of HRH the Queen attended to confirm the installation. The ceremony featured a procession at the university’s Senate House. The students held banners saying “Lord Sainsbury – freedom of speech is the basics!” and ‘Freedom of Expression? University Repression.” [1]

Over fifty prominent academics, authors and lawyers have signed a letter to the University of Cambridge asking that the suspended student be immediately reinstated. Signatories include Professor Terry Eagleton, the novelist Philip Hensher and the journalist Johann Hari, as well as lecturers from 30 Higher Education institutions across the UK. Over 7000 people have signed a general petition condemning Cambridge’s decision, including Michael Mansfield QC, a former contender for the position of Chancellor of the University. [3]

Cambridge student Amy Gilligan said: “Everybody is so angry about this decision. In the last few days the university has shown itself completely out of touch with its students and staff. Nobody in their right mind thinks a student should be punished for exercising his right to peacefully protest. I can’t imagine why they have gone after one student when over sixty people signed the Spartacus letter.”

Cambridge Alumni Richard Braude said “I used to be proud of having gone to Cambridge. Now I’m just embarrassed. I’ve spoken to a lot of friends and none of us intend to give a penny to the university until they change this terrible decision. I hope Lord Sainsbury knows how repressive the university is.”

[1] http://www.facebook.com/events/368493679849914/

[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-15326277

[3] http://www.defendeducation.co.uk/over-50-academics-sign-letter-condemning-student-conviction

International

Washington Post - Protests after Cambridge University student suspended for disrupting speech with poem

Globe and Mail (Canada) - Anger grows after Cambridge student gets 2-year suspension for poem protest

Russia Today – http://rt.com/news/line/2012-03-17/

Press TV - UK student gets 7 term-ban for universities minister protest

Der Spiegel - Cambridge verbannt Protest-Dichter

San Francisco Chronicle – Suspended for a poem

Diario de Noticias Globo – Universidade suspende estudante por interromper ministro

University World News – Cambridge student protester banned until 2014

National

BBC News - Cambridge protest planned for suspended student

Guardian - Cambridge student gets seven-term ban for poetic protest at Willetts speech

Morning Star - Cambridge bans student over protest

Huffington Post - Owen Holland, Cambridge University, Student Suspended For Poem

Workers’ Liberty – Student suspended for two and a half years for reading poem

Socialist Worker - Outrage as Cambridge student is suspended for Willetts protest

Independent – Cambridge student receives ‘unprecedented’ two-and-a-half year suspension for Universities Minister protest

Local

Cambridge News – Students march in support of suspended protester

Cambridge First – “This is a battle for the soul of this university” – 300 march on city in support of suspended student

Student

Varsity - Rallying Support: Students march against rustication sentence

Cherwell - Cambridge student banned for poem protest

TCS - ‘Justice for Owen’: 400 rally against rustication ruling

Tab – CUSU’s quiet riot for Holland

Comment

New Statesman – Owen Holland’s case shows the crackdown on dissent

Guardian – Our poetic Willetts protest was peaceful – banning a student for it is absurd

Independent - What is Cambridge thinking of? This is the act of a thug, not a university

London Review of Books – Cambridge cracks down

Earlymodernjohn - Cambridge University Cuts Off Nose; Face ‘Spited’

Left Futures – Protest is being crushed by a culture of examples

Samuel Butler’s novel, Erewhon, was published in 1872. It is an antipodean travel narrative, blended with techniques of utopian estrangement. In the land of Erewhon, as Butler’s protagonist discovers, it is a crime to suffer physical illness, or misfortune, whilst moral laxity is ‘treated’ by a special caste of straighteners. The following extract describes some of the peculiar goings-on of the Erewhonian legal system. Continue reading →

Today over five hundred Cambridge students and staff protested against the 2 ½ year suspension of a student. The student was suspended by a private university court – the “Court of Discipline” – after reading a poem in November 2011 at a peaceful protest against David Willetts, Minister for Universities and Sciences.

Following the news of the student’s punishment, Cambridge University Student Union (CUSU) organised a protest in support of the student.  Hundreds of students participated in this protest.  At a CDE meeting held after the protest, a statement of “no confidence in the university Vice Chancellor, management and Court of Discipline” was endorsed after a vote by the students and staff present. A petition against the judgement has already garnered over 6000 signatures, with over 2000 of them coming from students and academics at the university. The university also continues to receive hundreds of letters, emails and phone calls from its alumni who are pledging not to donate any further until the university repeals the decision.

At the protest CUSU President Gerard Tully read out a statement from the victimised student. In the statement, he says that: “I have been humbled by the level of support I have received these past few days. Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to assemble here today, and to everyone who has signed one of the various petitions expressing consternation at the severity of my sentence.”

“I can tell you that I plan to appeal the sentence before a higher court, and I have every hope that the seven senior members of this University will heed your calls for the sentence to be overturned.”

Before the hearing, sixty students and twenty dons signed a ‘Spartacus’ letter, which insisted that the protest against Willetts was a collective act and that singling out one student for punishment was “arbitrary and wrong”. In the letter the signatories asked to receive the same charge for the action. The letter has so far been ignored by the university Court of Discipline.

Gerard Tully, president of CUSU said: “The student body is demonstrating unprecedented anger over the disproportionate sentence handed down. The University has been caught out acting with no thought to precedent or to fairness, and ought to be ashamed of the message it sends. Two and a half years suspension for one person for one action is madness.”

Rachel Bower, a PhD student in English said: “Like the suspended student, I am also studying for a PhD in English. The punishment undermines the foundations of critical thought and debate that underpin our discipline, and supposedly the University as a whole. It endangers academic freedom, and makes me ashamed to be a member of the University today. I am glad so many of my fellow students have come out in support of our right to protest today.”

University officials, fearing a repeat of the Old School occupation two years ago, closed the Senate House gates. A spokesperson for the University said: “Senate House Yard is closed today in the interests of safety and the university will be monitoring the situation.”

Today the University of Cambridge suspended a junior member of the university until the end of 2014 for his part in a protest last November against David Willetts, government minister for Universities and Science. In a hearing that lasted six hours, the university Court of Discipline ruled that for his part in the peaceful disruption of Willetts’ speech the student would not be allowed back into the university until October 2014, and would not be allowed to use its premises. He has a right to appeal the decision in the next 28 days.

During the protest, the student read out a poem criticizing Willetts for his role in the implementation of £9000 fees and the Higher Education White Paper. He went on to condemn the minister as “a man who believes in the market and in the power of competition.”[1]

In response, over 60 dons and students wrote a ‘Spartacus’ letter to the University Advocate admitting to their role in the original protest, and demanding that they be charged for the same offence. [2] In the letter the signatories object to the fact that only one person has been prosecuted for the protest. The signatories denounce the charges as “arbitrary and wrong” pointing out that the protest was  “a collective act and that we the undersigned were all involved in it – whether directly or indirectly, actively or in a supportive capacity.”

Gerard Tully, President of CUSU (Cambridge University Student Union) said: “A balanced judgement reflecting the evidence and severity of the charges would not have handed down seven times what the University itself asked for. Should an appeal be lodged, we fully expect the University to apply reason and quash this heavy-handed and unfair sentence. For a University that so rightly prides itself on academic freedom and the justness of its procedures, there is simply no alternative.” [3] They have also launched a petition which has gained over 2000 signatures in less than two days from staff and students at the university. A petition open to all members of the public has reached over 3000 signatures. [4]

Rees Arnott-Davies, a student at Corpus Christi College said: “this is out of all proportion. Two and a half years for an entirely legal and peaceful protest is an absolute travesty and makes me ashamed to study at this university. The idea that you can protect freedom of speech by silencing protest is the height of hypocrisy.”

In a bizarre twist to the story, it has emerged that the presiding Judge had previously upheld the right to Freedom of Speech.  Judge Colin Colston, QC, ruled that a publican whose customers simulated sex with an inflatable doll was protected from prosecution under European Human Rights legislation. [5] Judge Colston also previously acted as a character witness for a don accused of sexually assaulting a student. [6]

[1] http://www.defendeducation.co.uk/go-home-david-an-epistle-to-david-willetts

[2] http://www.defendeducation.co.uk/charge-us-all-mr-vice-chancellor-and-university-advocate-thornton

[3] http://www.cusu.cam.ac.uk/

[4] http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/support-suspended-cambridge-university-student/

[5] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1334383/Human-rights-invoked-over-blow-up-dolls.html

[6] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1536305/Don-cleared-of-Benny-Hill-sex-assault.html

Dr R Thornton
University Advocate
University of Cambridge
Emmanuel College
Cambridge

7th March 2012

Dear Dr Thornton,

We understand that a student has been charged with “recklessly or
intentionally impeding free speech within the Precincts of the
University” in connection with the protest action which took place at
Lady Mitchell Hall on the 22nd of November 2011 when the Minister for
Universities and Science Mr David Willetts was scheduled to speak.

We regard the prosecution of a single junior member of the University
as arbitrary and wrong: we wish to point out that this was a collective
act and that we the undersigned were all involved in it – whether
directly or indirectly, actively or in a supportive capacity. We
therefore ask that the same charge be brought against each of us before
the appropriate University court.

Signed by the following:

RA Alexander
A al-Jeffery, W
R Arnott-Davies, CC
M Barford, T
N Bazin K
MB Beckles, K
T Belger CHU
D Benjamin, T
A Booth R
RE Bower CL
R Braude PEM
D Buchanan TH
S Carlo CHU
C Clarke K
A Diver CC
CR Doherty JN
F Docherty SID
A Odin Ekman W
BK Etherington CHU
L Finlayson K
K Forrester K
JB Frances K
M Galevski DAR
S Garrigan-Mattar G
L Gettings K
R Geuss
A Gilligan JN
P Gopal CHU
S Haf HOM
D Hillman K
M Hrebeniak W
K Jenkins EM
J Katko Q
A Komporozos-Athanasiou K
S Langsdale K
C Landin CHR
M Laven JES
EA Lee-Six T
A MacDonald K
L McMahon K
L McNulty HOM
TJ Miley DAR
CSB Miller HOM
M.J. Morey F
G Mulligan G
C Mouhot K
D Morris CC
F Musallam JN
G Oppitz-Trotman JN
O Oriogun-Williams CL
B Patrick N
C Page SID
T Phibbs K
M Phillips K
JH Prynne CAI
JE Riley W
A Ring N
LW Roberts JN
C Scozzaro JN
J Scott-Warren CAI
H Sillitoe K
A Shahvisi DAR
E Shang, EM
GM Stevenson FITZ
S Stillwell G
A Tatam W
F Taylor JN
I Urquhart HOM
P Vlad HOM
W Yaqoob PEM
CH Walker-Gore SE
J Whitfield K
H Warner CTH
H Wright CAI
A Wood T
N Zeeman K
AE Zurcher Q

cc The Vice-Chancellor

Cambridge
February 21, 2012

Dear Vice-Chancellor,

It is our understanding that, following a complaint lodged by the Proctors, the University has initiated disciplinary proceedings against a student for ‘impeding freedom of speech’ in the course of a protest action against the Minister for Universities and Science, Mr David Willetts, which took place on November 22, 2011 at Lady Mitchell Hall.

Although the event at which Mr Willetts was to speak was cancelled, over fifty senior members of the University issued a statement in which they agreed that ‘given the destructive policies of the present government, enacted without due consultation, we believe that the disruption of the Minister for Universities’ address and the subsequent occupation [were] proportionate and justified actions’. Therefore we again call on the University authorities not to persecute those involved in the protest; and ask that the University strike a more appropriate balance between protecting its members’ rights to freedom of assembly and association and the right of others to freedom of speech.

We wish also to express grave concern that one individual is being singled out for disciplinary action when a great many members of the University, both junior and senior, were involved. In the circumstances, we deplore the decision to prosecute one individual as either arbitrary (and so inherently unfair), or as an attempt ‘pour encourager les autres’ (and so itself an attack on freedom of expression within the University). By choosing to proceed in this way, the University has embarked on a course of action which could reasonably be supposed to intimidate this individual, and which therefore represents a failure of the University’s moral duty to them.

Finally, we are also concerned that the University seems to hold both photographic and audio-visual records of parts of the protest, as well as of individual members who were present, and that it is not clear whether this material was collected in a manner which accords with the restrictions and obligations imposed by the Data Protection Act 1998. We are further troubled that the collection of this sensitive personal data might be indicative of a move towards a ‘surveillance culture’ within the University. We believe that such a development would be incompatible with freedom of expression within the University, and with the general expectations of its members.

We believe these are serious issues, and that a failure to address them in a timely manner will damage the University’s reputation. In particular, we ask that the decision to punish this student be reconsidered. Given the exigency of this issue, we look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

Yours,
Dr Anne Alexander
Dr Anna Alexandrova
Dr Maike Albertzart
Dr M Atature
Dr H Azerad
Dr Tarak Barkawi
Dr Debbie Banham
Mr Bruce Beckles
Dr Duncan Bell
Dr Rowan Boyson
Dr Pam Burnard
Ms Sarah Cain
Dr Sophia Connell
Dr PJ Cunningham
Mr Will Davies
Dr Elizabeth Duignan
Dr Ben Etherington
Dr Lorna Finlayson
Dr Linda Fisher
Dr Alex Flynn
Dr Christophe Gagne
Professor Raymond Geuss
Dr Priyamvada Gopal
Dr Boris Groisman
Dr Jochen Guck
Mr Jeremy Hardingham
Mr Ronald Haynes
Dr David Hillman
Dr Edward Holberton
Dr Jana Howlett
Dr M Hrebeniak
Professor Simon Jarvis
Professor Cindi Katz
Dr Ruth Kershner
Professor John Kinsella
Dr Mary Laven
Dr Jessica Leech
Ms Mel Legatt
Professor John MacBeath
Dr Sinead Garrigan-Mattar
Dr Jeff Miley
Dr Clément Mouhot
Dr Subha Mukherji
Dr Kamal Munir
Dr Ian Patterson
Ms P Pointon
Mr JH Prynne
Dr Rory O’Bryen
Dr Jonathan Oppenheim
Dr George Oppitz-Trotman
Dr James Riley
Dr Josh Robinson
Dr Corinna Russell
Dr Jason Scott-Warren
Dr Adam Stewart-Wallace
Ms Isobel Urquhart
Dr Bert Vaux
Dr Isabel di Vanna
Dr Chris Warnes
Dr Ruth Watson
Mr Steve Watts
Dr David Whitley
Dr Andrew Zurcher