On Wednesday 15 March, a University Court in Cambridge ruled that Owen Holland, an activist in Cambridge Defend Education, was to be “rusticated” (i.e. thrown off his course) for two and a half years. His crime was to read a poem at a protest last term against David Willets, who was due to speak in Cambridge in a lecture series called “The Idea of the University.” Willets later left the talk without speaking, and the lecture hall was occupied.
Holland has been singled out by University authorities and charged with the vague offence of “wilfully impinging freedom of speech” - the irony of condemning a poetry reading as an attack on free speech beggars belief. After charges were brought against Owen, 60 people, including 20 academics, signed a “Spartacus letter” calling on the University to charge them as well. The University has ignored this. Instead, they have chosen to charge a single person over the actions of many.
There is no precedent for this in the recent history of University discipline. The last time the courts heard a “protest related offence” they fined the individual £100. The last person to be thrown off his course was caught plagiarising the thesis of another candidate, word for word. However, by setting this new precedent, Cambridge University is sending a simple message to its students – put a toe out of line and we will ruin your career. This brutal style of "justice" – the court held its proceedings out of the public gaze, and as declared itself “independent” of the university – combines bizarre Cambridge University medievalism with the more general assault against the right to protest on campus and in society which is taking place across the country.
Both Cambridge University Students Union and Cambridge Defend Education have been quick to respond. Two petitions have been posted online, one for Cambridge students, one for alumni and people outside the university, and these have amassed almost 4000 signatures at time of writing. CUSU has called a “Defend Our Right to Protest” demo for Friday 16 March at 1pm, meeting outside Great St Mary's Church. (Facebook event here.) More soon.
Its better to be truthful
Holland was not suspended for reading a poem, and it is embarrasing that you report it as such. Where was it read? Under what circumstances? Is the fact that he read a poem even relevant? He could have read a laundry list or a cafe menu or Hamlet.
Clearly the intention was to prevent an invited speaker from being able to speak. The technique used - everyone repeating every few words - is inherently not only rude, but aggressive and anti free speech.
It would have been more honourable to report on what actually took place. Everyone knows anyway.
In the long run, its better to be truthful.
John