A controversial case study that aimed to help guide universities on gender segregation at events featuring Islamic speakers has been withdrawn after David Cameron waded into the row over Universities UK¡¯s advice.

The prime minister said universities should not be able to separate men and women at the request of guest speakers, a Downing Street spokesman said on 13 December.

His comments came amid growing criticism of legal advice issued by UUK last month, which says a speaker¡¯s right to religious expression may be violated if a request to segregate an audience is not allowed for in some way.

A case study published as part of the advice says side-by-side segregation might be a possibility because this step would not disadvantage either sex, though it must be voluntary.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

However, after Mr Cameron¡¯s intervention, Nicola Dandridge, UUK¡¯s chief executive, said the case study would be withdrawn pending a review of the document.

¡°Universities UK agrees entirely with the prime minister that universities should not enforce gender segregation on audiences at the request of guest speakers,¡± she said.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°However, where the gender segregation is voluntary, the law is unclear. We are working with our lawyers and the [Equality and Human Rights Commission] to clarify the position.

¡°Meanwhile the case study which triggered this debate has been withdrawn pending this review.¡±

Education secretary Michael Gove was among others who had also accused UUK bosses of ¡°pandering to extremism¡± by issuing the advice.

¡°Speakers who insist on segregating audiences should not indulged by educators,¡± said Mr Gove.

Shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna said he was ¡°horrified¡± by the advice, which was also condemned by former Labour home secretary Jack Straw.

Ms Dandridge has also faced criticism after she said that gender segregation is not completely ¡°alien to our culture¡± in an interview on BBC Radio 4¡¯s Today programme.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°We are not talking about universities enforcing segregation,¡± Ms Dandridge told the programme on 12 December.

¡°One of the questions that runs through our case study which illustrates this questions is: ¡®Is this segregation voluntary, have the people who are likely to come to this event agreed to the segregation?¡¯¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

According to a , the organisation¡¯s advice was ¡°lawful¡± and ¡°provides an appropriate foundation for lawful decision-making¡±.

However, the advice was further thrown into doubt by a statement published on 13 December by Mark Hammond, chief executive of the EHRC.

¡°Equality law permits gender segregation in premises that are permanently or temporarily being used for the purposes of an organised religion where its doctrines require it,¡± he said.

¡°However, in an academic meeting or in a lecture open to the public it is not, in the Commission¡¯s view, permissible to segregate by gender.¡±

Mr Hammond said UUK should clarify its guidance, which ¡°concludes that the imposition of segregated seating in certain circumstances could be permissible.¡±

¡°The guidance also gives the impression that the right to manifest or express a religious belief should be balanced against the right not to be discriminated against,¡± he said.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°We think the guidance could be clearer on what the legal framework lays down on these issues to avoid any risk of misrepresenting the legal position.¡±

jack.grove@tsleducation.com