Sussex students during their university sit-in protest (Image: Occupy Sussex via Facebook)
Freedom of assembly and expression on British campus has become a hot topic, following two recent high profile cases.
On 5 December, five students from the University of Sussex were suspended for occupying a university building in protest at working conditions of staff, and privatisation. “We fully support students’ rights to protest lawfully. There have been regular demonstrations on a range of issues that have passed off peacefully,” said university’s registrar, John Duffy, according to the BBC. “But the university has been very clear that we will not tolerate any violence, intimidation or serious disruption. Unfortunately, we have seen all three of these kinds of behaviour once more take place in connection with the recent occupation and subsequent events.”
The same day, 41 people were arrested as 100 police officers broke up a sit-in protesting attempts to shut down the University of London Student Union, Channel 4 reported. The Metropolitan Police claimed, among other things, that smoke bombs had been thrown at them, while University of London Student Union president Michael Chessum said the methods used by the police towards the students were “at a level of violence beyond anything I’d ever seen before.” The day before, the body representing London universities had also obtained a court order banning “occupational protest” for six months — a move labelled “draconian” by Chessum. ‘This is a regrettable but necessary step that we have taken in order to prevent the type of violent and intimidating behaviour that we have seen by protesters at Senate House recently,’ said Chris Cobb, Chief Operating Officer at the university.
John McDonnell MP tabled an early day motion, calling on Vice Chancellor Michael Farthing, “to retract the suspension of five Sussex students”. He commented that: “I am deeply anxious about the whole range of protests that are taking place because they are all peaceful, they are all students seeking to make their voices heard.
“But they’re being met with real intimidation and suspending students for an occupation is not acceptable.”
“It’s outrageous that students exercising their traditional democratic right to protest have been persecuted in this way.”
Michael Segalov, one of the suspended students from Sussex wrote in a comment piece in the Guardian that he believe him and the others “have been targeted for suspension, to intimidate the growing campus movement against privatisation.”
“Our occupation received national attention and the support of key political figures, activists and journalists. We are continuing to humiliate management. So they have tried to silence us while professing their support in principle for protest. Only yesterday afternoon, the university released a statement, saying they “fully support students’ rights to protest lawfully”. Their actions suggest otherwise.”
An online petition in support of the Sussex students has also received over 9,000 signatures. “The University of Sussex Students’ Union firmly believes in the right of students to protest against practices they deem unjust, and condemns the intimidation of students undertaking protest action by University management,” the petition read. “We do not believe he has grounds to suspend or exclude these students, and we call on the VC not to criminalise protest.”
The suspension has now been lifted, but this is not the end of the case, reports the Argus. “The University continues to take forward disciplinary processes in relation to these five students, who were involved in organising or leading the repeated serious disruption of campus through occupations, which have been characterised by intimidating behaviour, theft, damage and violence,” the University said in a statement.
Students at the University of London, meanwhile, have sent an open letter to the administration. “Universities ought to be nuclei of societal dialogue, as well as progressive political thought and action. Under no circumstances should they repress peaceful demonstrations. We stand in solidarity with all students of the University who exercise their right to peaceful protest, and denounce all attempts to curtail this right,” they write.
Activists have also called for a national day of action, set to take place tomorrow. “Across the country, students are initiating a vibrant, popular, winnable fight for democratic and public universities, free from exploitation and repression. We cannot be beaten if we stand together,” reads the description on a Facebook event asking people to meet at 2pm, 11 December at the University of London Union (ULU), or organise locally.
Are you passionate about freedom of expression? Do you want to write for an award-winning, internationally renowned magazine and website, which has published the works of Aung San Suu Kyi, Salman Rushdie and Arthur Miller? Then enter Index on Censorship’s student blogging competition!
The winning entry will be published in Index on Censorship magazine, a celebrated, agenda-setting international affairs publication. It will be posted on our popular and influential website, which attracts contributors and readers from around the world. Index is one of the leading international go-to sources for hard-hitting coverage of the biggest threats and challenges to freedom of expression today. This competition is a fantastic opportunity for any aspiring writer to reach a global, diverse and informed audience.
The winner will also be awarded £100, be invited to attend the launch party of our latest magazine in London, get to network with leading figures from international media and human rights organisations, and will receive a one-year subscription to Index on Censorship magazine.
To be in with a chance of winning, send your thoughts on the vital human right that guides our work across the world, from the UK to Brazil to Azerbaijan. Write a 500-word blog post on the following topic:
“What is the biggest challenge facing freedom of expression in the world today?
This can cover old-fashioned repression, threats to digital freedom, religious clampdown or barriers to access to freedom of expression, focusing on any region or country around the world.”
The competition is open to all first year undergraduate students in the UK, and the winning entry will be determined by a panel of distinguished judges including Index Chair Jonathan Dimbleby. To enter, submit your blog post to [email protected] by 31 May 2013.
Several reports yesterday and today suggest that police will have baton rounds “available” to them at the student demonstration planned for 9 November.
This has led to some outrage. The Guardian got this absurd quote from Green Party London Assembly member Jenny Jones:
Any officer that shoots a student with a baton round will have to answer to the whole of London. How did we come to this? An unpopular government pushing ahead with policies that are all pain and no gain, relying on police armed with plastic bullets to deal with young people who complain about it all. The prospect of the police shooting at unarmed demonstrators with any kind of bullet is frankly appalling, un-British and reminiscent of scenes currently being used by murderous dictatorships in the Middle East.
This is a bizarre and wrongheaded comparison. To suggest that the possibility of baton rounds being used on protesters in London is somehow the same as the fact of tank shells being fired at protesters in Homs is insulting to people standing against genuine tyranny, as opposed to an “unpopular government”.
Then there is the idea that plastic bullets are somehow “un-British”, which will be news to the people of Northern Ireland, both the ones who identify as British and those who don’t.
Meanwhile, Chavs author Owen Jones has tweeted that the police are using “threats about rubber bullets” in an attempt to “intimidate protesters”. Jones fails to identify what exactly the “threat” is.
In fact, if one examines the language of the Metropolitan Police statement, what we are dealing with is a contingency rather than a threat. This from the BBC:
In a statement, Scotland Yard said rubber bullets – also known as baton rounds – were “carried by a small number of trained officers”, none of whom would be patrolling the route of the march.
“This tactic requires pre-authority, and would take time to deploy, and is one of a range of tactics we have had available for public order, and not used, in the past.”
The story seems to have first emerged on London radio station LBC yesterday. But it is really not a story at all, or at least not a development. The Metropolitan Police have always had the capacity to use rubber bullets, and chosen not to do so.
If it is the case that an LBC reporter contacted the police to ask them if plastic bullets were part of the police’s arsenal to deal with disturbance, it would have been wrong of the police to deny this was the case. But this is very, very different from saying they would be used, and indeed counterintuitive to Met tactics on protest. Plastic bullets are not very useful for containment, which is the Metropolitan Police’s current method of dealing with protesters. Containment (including “kettling”) involves close quarters engagement with protesters, circumstances in which, again, the use of plastic bullets would be absurd (and absurdly dangerous to all parties).
Perhaps the police should be clearer on their tactics and arsenal, but those who claim to be on the side of the protesters should be careful not to create unnecessary tension.
Reading The Economist’s Bagehot blog, earlier this week its writer’s dismissal of Britain’s student protests with “The revolution will be along later” was resonant of the final analysis many made of Iran’s “Green” movement: despite the unforgettable mass post-election uprising — in which Iran’s students were central to the movement, upholding the historic role of Iran’s universities as the hub of political thought and activity— there has been little change in Iran, let alone a revolution.
Bagehot’s commentary also called to my mind that Iran’s Student Day is nearly here. Naturally 16 Azar (7 December) presents a platform for the students’ voices. Last year the day exuded added fervour as students used 16 Azar to resume their previously silenced protest at the “stolen” election. One year on, Iranian students at universities in Iran and worldwide prepare in solidarity with the movement, with slogans of “Ma Amadeim”, “We are Ready” and “The University is Alive”.
16 Azar was named after the killing of three Tehran University students on that day in 1953. The police opened fire on students demonstrating against US vice president Richard Nixon’s visit following a US-sponsored coup earlier that year. A good synopsis of this day’s history can be read here.
The last 12 months have seen a mass exodus of Iran’s intelligentsia and student leaders to safer lands, and many others languish in Iran’s prisons. “Revolution” it may not be, but expect to hear Iran’s students reciting Yar-e Dabestani(My Soul/Classmate) the freedom poem written by Mansour Tehrani
Ma Zendeh Be Aaneem Ke Aaraam Nageereem We are alive by virtue of our restlessness Mojeem Ke Asoodegi-y-e-Ma Adam-e-Maast We are like waves that die through calm Yar-e-Dabestani-y-e-man My old school mate Ba Man-o-Hamrah-e-Manee You are with me and by my side Choob-e-Alefe Barsar-e-Ma When the cane is wielded over our heads Boghz-e-Man-o-Aah-e-Manee You share my pain and anguish Hak Shodeh Esm’e Man-o-To Engraved are the names of you and I Rooy-e-Een Takhte Siyah On this blackboard Tark-e-y-e-Beedaad-e-Setam Scars of the lashes of tyranny Maandeh Hanooz Roo Tan-e-Ma Have stayed on our bodies
Dasht-e-Bi-Farhang-e-Ma Our culturally desolate wilderness Harz-e Tamaam-e-Alafhaayash All but weeds. Khoob Age Khoob Bad Age Bad Be it good or bad Dast-e-Man-o To Baayad Een Pardeh Raa Paareh Konad My hands and your hands have to tear down this curtain Kee Be Joz Man-o-To Dard-e-Maaro Chaare Konad Who other than you or I will find the cure to our ills Yar-e-Dabestani-y-e-Man.
