The University of Cambridge has been accused of an ¡°all-out attack on freedom of expression and assembly¡± over its attempt to prohibit pro-Palestinian protests at the administrative heart of the institution.

An application by the institution for a five-year injunction placing legal restrictions on pro-Palestine protests at its Senate House and Old Schools sites was due to be heard at the High Court on 27 February. The application also covers Greenwich House, an administrative building on the Madingley Rise site.

Members of the Cambridge for Palestine protest group held an encampment on the frontage of King¡¯s College, Cambridge for several months last year, protesting against Israeli military action in Gaza, and there were two occupations of Senate House Yard, which forced the university to relocate graduation ceremonies. Greenwich House was also occupied during November.

Cambridge¡¯s claim expresses ¡°serious concern¡± that confidential information was accessed in Greenwich House, that demonstrations have caused significant disruption to administrative work and have disrupted more than 1,500 graduation ceremonies.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

The university estimates that the additional cleaning, security and legal costs amount to at least ?230,000 ¨C and that there is also an ¡°intangible, non-monetary harm suffered by the graduands and their families if the graduations do not take place in Senate House¡±.

¡°The application is necessary to protect the university¡¯s staff and students, its property, the interests of its research and funding partners, and the interests of the wider university community, from irreparable harm, which would be suffered if these protests were to continue unrestrained and/or if further encampments were to be established on the land,¡± the claim says.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

However, the University and College Union (UCU), human rights organisation Liberty and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign warned that the injunction risked creating a dangerous legal precedent across UK higher education.

Clement Mouhot, professor of mathematical sciences at Cambridge, said the application was ¡°nothing short of an all-out attack on freedom of expression and assembly, and the right to protest¡±.

¡°Our students have been organising non-violent demonstrations for more than a year against the?ongoing genocide in Gaza: their most ¡®radical¡¯ demand has been a ceasefire as well as calling for an end to massacres of civilians and illegal occupation.¡±

Campus resource collection:?Higher education¡¯s role in upholding democracy

?expresses ¡°grave concern¡± over the injunction and accused Cambridge of an ¡°authoritarian reflex¡±?that has no place in the governance of a university.

The injunction?defines the defendants as anyone who ¡°for a purpose connected with the Palestine-Israel conflict, without the claimant¡¯s consent¡± protests on or ¡°slow[s] down¡± access to central administrative and ceremonial university premises.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

However, UCU believes that this risks criminalising non-disruptive peaceful protest in the centre of the city, for local residents as well as students and staff.

UCU general secretary?Jo Grady said Cambridge¡¯s ¡°shameful attack¡± on basic democratic rights was ¡°making a mockery of its reputation as an open institution¡±.

¡°Worse, in its repressive legal move against freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, Cambridge risks setting a precedent which could be used to shut down peaceful protest at universities across the country,¡± she said.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

The controversy comes just days after??revealed that up to 113 students and staff across at least 28 universities had been placed under investigation for?pro-Palestine protests since 7 October 2023.

Ruth Ehrlich, Liberty¡¯s head of policy and campaigns, said universities were ¡°infringing on students¡¯ rights by creating a hostile space for people simply trying to make their voices heard on an issue that matters to them¡±.?

¡°Students have long been at the forefront of movements for social change. It¡¯s vital that their right to protest on campus is protected,¡± she added.

A Cambridge spokesperson said any claim that the university was trying to restrict protest was ¡°ridiculous¡± and that it did not restrict the right to legal protest.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°There are many ways protests can take place and voices can be heard, but the actions we are taking will protect the right of other members of our community to graduate and for staff to carry out their work,¡± they said.

patrick.jack@timeshighereducation.com