Latest news with #ELSC
Wales Online
3 hours ago
- Politics
- Wales Online
Cardiff University students threatened with jail if they protest without permission on campus
Cardiff University students threatened with jail if they protest without permission on campus Cardiff University has obtained a High Court injunction in response to the now-disbanded Palestine camp outside its main building Protesters occupied a site at Cardiff University's main building for 56 days in support of Palestine in 2024 (Image: John Myers ) Anyone picketing on Cardiff University property risks being jailed following a High Court injunction obtained in response to the now-disbanded Palestine camp outside the main building. The injunction effectively bans any protest and pickets taking place on university property without executive approval. Critics say they realise it was sought in response to the Palestine protest but fear it has much wider-ranging impacts on future protests. The university denied it is banning free speech or legitimate protest and said the injunction was needed to keep the campus secure. The High Court injunction gives the university the right to prohibit all protest activity on 10 sites across its campus. The injunction applies both to university property and to adjoining public highways and was granted until July 2026. The injunction warns: 'Anyone in breach of the order will be in contempt of court and may be imprisoned, fined, or have their assets seized.' Pro-Palestine protesters outside Cardiff University's Centre for Student Life in February 2025 (Image: What's Occurin' CUTV ) Article continues below Never miss a Cardiff story by signing up to our daily newsletter here The Caerdydd Students for Palestine first set up the encampment calling for peace in Palestine outside the main university building in May 2024. They returned in May this year but were forced to leave after an eviction notice was served by the university. The successful injunction application was opposed by the European Legal Support Centre (ELSC) which argued, among other points, that there was no need for an injunction as the Palestine camp had disbanded.. Sir Peter Lane rejected all the ELSC's arguments and awarded the university the injunction on June 13. Notices have now been put up around the university warning staff and students about the injunction which was described as "draconian" by an academic at another institution. Dr Val Aston, lecturer in criminal and human rights law at Swansea University, and an expert in how protest is policed, said: 'It is very concerning that Cardiff University has resorted to the use of protest injunctions. These are draconian measures which impose potentially severe penalties for activities which are otherwise entirely lawful and legitimate." She said universities should be a place of open discussion and the injunction potentially encompasses any form of assembly on university grounds that is not agreed by the university. Cardiff University branch of the UCU union said staff had raised concerns too. "Now that we have seen the full wording of the injunction we think it raises serious worries about staff and students' right to protest as well as potentially endangering legitimate trade union activities such as picketing and holding rallies," a spokesman said. But in a message to staff and students Cardiff University chief operating officer Dr Paula Sanderson said the injunction does not prevent the right of staff and students to take part in legal and peaceful protest or supporting a political view or cause within the law. She said any suggestion the university has banned every form of protest is wrong. She said: "Cardiff University has a strong and proud tradition of protest. It's a vital tenet upon which our community operates and which we respect. The court order recognises and preserves that. We remain absolutely committed to free speech – peaceful protest is part of the DNA of our university and the court order enables our staff and students to continue to do so peacefully and safely. "When summing up the evidence the judge was explicit – there was compelling evidence for the order however it does not prohibit conduct or protest which is lawful." The Palestine protest outside Cardiff University in June 2024 (Image: Rob Browne / Media Wales ) Dr Sanderson and a university spokesperson said the reason the injunction was sought was, in part, prompted by the recent Palestine encampment "and associated disruption" outside the university's main and other key buildings. The recent protest, and a previous Palestine protest encampment in Horseshoe Drive at the Main Building, was set up without the university's consent and raised safety, wellbeing, and safeguarding issues, they said. Efforts were made to engage but members of the encampment had largely refused to identify themselves and chose to conceal their identities, the spokesman said, and this meant it wasn't even clear if they were students. As well as occupying Horseshoe Drive without consent protesters had blocked both entrances to the main building in recent weeks preventing staff and students from work, study, and preparing for exams, the university added. That meant buildings being closed, tabled exams and other events being moved, and research activity disrupted. Events and external visitors had also been targeted by protesters. Rooms in the Glamorgan Building and other buildings were also occupied by members of the Palestine protest. "These recent incidents – as well as other incidents over the last 12 months – have had an adverse impact on university business. They have caused disruption and distress to members of our university community resulting in a number of complaints which we have a duty to investigate and take appropriate action," the spokesman added. "We did not take this decision lightly. However this action became necessary to bring an end to disruption and deter others from seeking to risk day-to-day university business. The action is also in line with that taken at other universities in Wales and across the UK. 'Following careful consideration the university issued a notice to vacate to the encampment on Friday, May 16. The deadline to leave was ignored and they continued to occupy without permission to do so, in breach of that notice. 'As a result we were left with little option other than to seek an order for possession and an order for precautionary injunctive relief from the court. This was not a decision we took lightly. However this action is necessary to bring an end to the ongoing disruption. "We appreciate that some may disagree with this action and it could be interpreted as curtailing the right to protest and freedom of speech but this is not the case. This decision is about ensuring the safety of everyone in our university community – including those within the encampment itself – and is similar action to that taken by other universities who have experienced unauthorised encampments.' Article continues below
Middle East Eye
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Middle East Eye
Mother in Germany separated from one-year-old son over Palestinian activism
A Palestinian-Jordanian woman with German residency was separated from her one-year-old after German authorities deemed the child a security threat, she and her lawyers say. The European Legal Support Centre, which is supporting her case, say the woman is the latest victim of the German state's weaponisation of residency issues to repress Palestinian solidarity. Since 2019, the Amsterdam-based legal advocacy group has documented at least 22 incidents in Germany in which residency status or restrictions to freedom of movement have been used to stifle such solidarity. 'The German state systematically exploits residence, asylum and citizenship law to punish already marginalised communities,' said an ELSC spokesperson. 'There is no justification for separating a newborn from his parents, yet to label the child a 'security threat' marks a grotesque new low, even by their own oppressive standards." New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters A trained nurse, Dima* moved from Jordan to Germany in 2017 for work, and was joined four years later by her husband. In 2023, they had their first child. In August 2024, when her child turned one, the family travelled to Jordan so that Dima and her husband's parents could meet their grandchild for the first time. As they tried to board a return flight two weeks later, Dima was told that her son lacked the necessary permit to re-enter Germany. At the time, her lawyers say, the German embassy in Jordan suggested it was a minor bureaucratic matter that could be solved in a few weeks. When Dima had applied for permanent residency back in October 2023, she and her husband had received green certificates that allow holders to exit and re-enter Germany while they wait for a permanent residency card. Their son was also given a green residency certificate which looked exactly the same as his parents, but did not allow for entry or exit. Security threat But the issue wasn't so simple: four months later, the embassy said in a letter that Dima's son was not allowed to go back to Germany because he had been deemed a security threat. Ebru Akcan Asilturk, Dima's Frankfurt-based immigration lawyer who became involved in the case around this time, said she assumed, when she read the letter, there had been a mistake. 'I thought, 'OK, this is obviously a misunderstanding we can solve directly',' she said. But in December 2024, Germany's migration office sent another letter clarifying that there was, in fact, an issue with Dima, not her son. Dima also learned through the letter for the first time that the Verfassungsschutz, Germany's domestic intelligence service, was investigating her. The probe is ongoing and would have been triggered by her permanent residency application nearly two years ago, her lawyers have said. 'I didn't say anything that is considered a red line. I always went to demonstrations that were accepted by the authorities in Germany' - Dima*, Palestinian-Jordanian mother Dima has been told by authorities that she is being investigated because of her alleged involvement with Palestinian solidarity groups, including Samidoun Deutschland, an organisation that Germany banned in November 2023. She contends that all of her Palestinian activism in Germany has been legal. 'I didn't say anything that is considered a red line. I always went to demonstrations that were accepted by the authorities in Germany. I always registered whatever action I wanted to do,' she said. Instead, she believes the case is an attempt to suppress her point of view and reflective of a wider crackdown on activists like her in Germany. 'They don't have freedom of speech. It's only there if you agree with what they say,' she said. Both Dima and Asilturk say they believe that authorities took advantage of the problem with Dima's son's certificate not allowing for his exit and re-entry into Germany as an excuse to put the family in an impossible position that would force them to give up their residency. Requests for comment from the German foreign ministry and domestic intelligence authorities were not answered. Hard choices The family has been left in a precarious position. This February, in response to an urgent appeal that Asilturk filed in November 2024, the administrative court in Berlin ruled that Dima's son's re-entry to Germany was not a matter of urgency. 'They said the son is in Jordan. He cannot come back to Germany, but the parents can go back to Germany and they can visit him,' Asilturk said. 'Or they can stay in Jordan with him and wait until the main proceedings.' But if Dima stayed in Jordan, she would lose her residence card, said Asilturk who has appealed the decision in the Higher Administrative Court Berlin-Brandenburg. Meanwhile, the family was separated for nine months in total, as Dima and her husband took turns leaving their son with family to try to maintain their lives in Germany. These were nine particularly crucial months, Dima said. Her son was still breastfeeding while also starting, at the age of one, to become less emotionally attached to her and having a closer relationship with his father. How Germany's former foreign minister failed Gaza - then got a top UN job Read More » 'My child started calling anyone in the street papa. Unfortunately, he will call anyone mama as well. He doesn't have the grasp. He lost it,' Dima said. A decision on Asilturk's appeal at the higher court is expected imminently. Meanwhile, the ELSC has filed a challenge with the Federal Constitutional Court challenging the administrative court's handling of Dima's case. The outcome could help protect other families from experiencing this in the future, something Dima said she is determined to see through. "I'm sure, if this has happened to me, this has happened to many families before. It doesn't matter if they are Palestinian or something else. I don't think they were able to fight it in court because they didn't have the support," she said. "But I don't believe that this has never happened. In the current situation, I don't believe it was a first. I just believe that I was the first one to have that support to fight it." Dima is the first generation of her family that was not born in Palestine, where her mother's family was forced to leave in 1948 and her father's in 1967. She hoped to move at some point to Palestine, but with only her Jordanian passport, she said she would probably not be able to do that. Still she said she felt the activism she has done in Germany, which was much more she said than she would have been allowed in Jordan, has made her feel like she already made it to Palestine somehow. "I felt in Palestine sometimes, with the atmosphere around me, by the chants we used to chant. I felt it was so close to Palestine in ways. It was never like that in Jordan," she said. "This is the hardest part to be honest." * A pseudonym has been used to protect the identity of the mother during the ongoing legal challenge.
Arab News
03-04-2025
- Politics
- Arab News
University of Birmingham students facing disciplinary hearing over pro-Palestine activism
LONDON: Two pro-Palestine students at the UK's University of Birmingham are facing disciplinary proceedings over their activism, with a major legal rights group sounding the alarm over a 'nationwide crackdown' on solidarity with the Palestinian people. The European Legal Support Centre submitted legal documents to the university's misconduct panel on behalf of the two students, Mariyah Ali and Antonia Listrat. Amid the war in Gaza and sweeping pro-Palestine solidarity at institutions across the UK, the two students had demanded that their university divest from arms companies supplying the Israeli military. Ali and Listrat face a disciplinary hearing on April 7, with the ELSC urging the university to dismiss the proceedings. Coventry MP Zarah Sultana labeled the university's move 'an assault on democratic rights,' while the decision was questioned by UN Special Rapporteur Gina Romero, who highlighted 'harassment, intimidation and reprisals' against the students at the university. The pair have been supported by the university's student body, which elected Listrat as guild president and Ali as ethnic minorities officer. Ali said: 'The disciplinary process against Antonia and me is a blatant attempt to suppress dissent and silence the wider student movement. 'This authoritarian crackdown is not just an attack on our right to protest — it is a display of institutional Islamophobia and bureaucratic repression. 'The student movement for Palestine is stronger than ever. Instead of charging students, the University of Birmingham must focus on divesting from companies complicit in genocide and war crimes.' The student union also passed a motion supporting pro-Palestine solidarity that was subsequently blocked by union trustees. By taking punitive measures against the students, the university is 'contradicting the democratic will of students,' the ELSC said. Anna Ost, the center's senior legal officer, added: 'We are deeply concerned that the university's intention and effect in targeting these two students is to dissuade the wider university community from speaking out for Palestine. 'The university needs to change its approach, drop the disciplinaries, and demonstrate that fundamental freedoms are still promoted on its campus.' The targeting of the students is part a wider crackdown on pro-Palestine activism across the UK in the wake of Israel's war in Gaza. Since October 2023, at least 28 universities across the UK have disciplined more than 113 students for activism, a joint investigation by Sky News and Liberty Investigates found. The ELSC warned that the campus crackdowns, which have involved police and private security, is creating a 'chilling effect' that 'sets a dangerous precedent for campus democracy.' British universities are legally bound to protect freedom of expression under the education and human rights acts, it added, warning that the University of Birmingham is 'violating these obligations by penalizing students for their political beliefs.' The center called on the university to dismiss the charges against the students and uphold freedom of speech, expression and assembly on campus. Listrat said protesting is 'an integral part of campus life' that signifies a 'healthy and progressive society.' She added: 'As far-right rhetoric rises throughout the world, we need to make a huge effort to protect our rights and uphold international law and morality. 'Enabling genocide and profiting from human rights violations is quite a violent stance that the University of Birmingham has taken. Funding genocide is violent; protesting genocide is peaceful.'
The Independent
21-03-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
University of Cambridge granted High Court injunction against protesters
The University of Cambridge has been granted a High Court order blocking Israel- Palestine protests on parts of its campus until the end of July. Last month, a judge dismissed a request by the university for a five-year injunction blocking direct action related to the conflict on several sites without the university's consent. The university returned to the High Court on Wednesday, asking a judge for a four-month injunction preventing protesters from disrupting multiple graduation events on two sites planned up to July 26, the final graduation ceremony of the academic year. The European Legal Support Center (ELSC) opposed the university's bid, with its lawyers telling the court the injunction is a 'disproportionate infringement' on the human rights of the protesters and would set a 'dangerous precedent' for protesting on campuses. In a ruling on Friday, Mr Justice Soole granted the injunction, stating there is an 'imminent and real risk of a recurrence' of direct action on the campus and a 'strong probability that this will otherwise occur' if the order is not issued. He said: 'I am satisfied that there is a compelling need for the granting of an injunction.' He added the 'proposed terms are the minimum necessary in the circumstances'. Lawyers for the university told the court in London that last year, pro-Palestine protesters staged demonstrations at Senate House Yard and Greenwich House, which 'forced' a graduation ceremony to be moved. Myriam Stacey KC, for the university, told the hearing there is a 'real and imminent risk' of further action on campus, with protesters saying 'we will be back' after leaving Senate House Yard at the end of November. She said the protesters appeared to be mostly affiliated with the group Cambridge for Palestine, whose stated aims online include for the university to 'divest from institutions and companies complicit in the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine'. She told the court: 'It is the activity we are seeking to stop, not the viewpoint. It is legally irrelevant who is doing this. It is what they are doing that we object to.' Ms Stacey continued in written submissions that the university sought to prohibit protesters from entering, occupying or remaining on the sites for direct action without its consent, directly blocking access to the sites, or erecting or placing structures on them, such as tents or sleeping equipment. Owen Greenhall, for ELSC, said in written submissions the university was discriminating against the 'race and/or political belief' of protesters as it was only after pro-Palestine actions that it began seeking an injunction, allowing other demonstrations such as those for Ukraine or industrial action. He said an injunction was 'not necessary' and would have a 'chilling effect on political expression at Cambridge'. But Mr Justice Soole said the injunction 'does provide a fair balance between the rights of all parties'. Following the ruling, a spokesperson for the university said: 'The University of Cambridge welcomes today's decision at the High Court. 'We took this action to protect the right of students to graduate and to prevent access to buildings that contain sensitive, confidential information. 'This was never about preventing lawful protest. The injunction safeguards a very small part of the University estate from an occupation that would prevent graduations from going ahead. 'It also protects the right for our staff to work. Protests occur regularly at the university, including a rally held immediately outside Great St Mary's church during the last graduation ceremony while an injunction covering the Senate House, a few yards away, was in place.' Cambridge for Palestine said it 'condemns' the decision, which it described as 'a violent move to criminalise and police our movement'. Anna Ost, senior legal officer at ELSC, said: 'It is more important than ever to resist attempts to shut down protests for Palestinian liberation. 'The extent of the five-year injunction the university originally asked for demonstrated that they were seeking to restrict protests.' She continued: 'Instead of acting urgently to review their investments, the university has stalled and sought to silence their critics with this injunction. 'We remain deeply concerned about the broader trend of universities using legal measures to target solidarity with Palestine.' Ruth Ehrlich, head of advocacy and campaigns at Liberty, which also intervened in the case, said: 'Today's judgment sets a dangerous precedent which will severely restrict protest rights on campus. 'Students have long been at the forefront of movements for social change, whether in opposing apartheid or rising tuition fees. 'It is not right that universities are curbing students' ability to do so, and creating a hostile space for people simply trying to make their voices heard. 'We urge universities to allow students to speak up for what they believe in on campus, and to protect the right to protest.'
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
University of Cambridge granted High Court injunction against protesters
The University of Cambridge has been granted a High Court order blocking Israel-Palestine protests on parts of its campus until the end of July. Last month, a judge dismissed a request by the university for a five-year injunction blocking direct action related to the conflict on several sites without the university's consent. The university returned to the High Court on Wednesday, asking a judge for a four-month injunction preventing protesters from disrupting multiple graduation events on two sites planned up to July 26, the final graduation ceremony of the academic year. The European Legal Support Center (ELSC) opposed the university's bid, with its lawyers telling the court the injunction is a 'disproportionate infringement' on the human rights of the protesters and would set a 'dangerous precedent' for protesting on campuses. In a ruling on Friday, Mr Justice Soole granted the injunction, stating there is an 'imminent and real risk of a recurrence' of direct action on the campus and a 'strong probability that this will otherwise occur' if the order is not issued. He said: 'I am satisfied that there is a compelling need for the granting of an injunction.' He added the 'proposed terms are the minimum necessary in the circumstances'. Lawyers for the university told the court in London that last year, pro-Palestine protesters staged demonstrations at Senate House Yard and Greenwich House, which 'forced' a graduation ceremony to be moved. Myriam Stacey KC, for the university, told the hearing there is a 'real and imminent risk' of further action on campus, with protesters saying 'we will be back' after leaving Senate House Yard at the end of November. She said the protesters appeared to be mostly affiliated with the group Cambridge for Palestine, whose stated aims online include for the university to 'divest from institutions and companies complicit in the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine'. She told the court: 'It is the activity we are seeking to stop, not the viewpoint. It is legally irrelevant who is doing this. It is what they are doing that we object to.' Ms Stacey continued in written submissions that the university sought to prohibit protesters from entering, occupying or remaining on the sites for direct action without its consent, directly blocking access to the sites, or erecting or placing structures on them, such as tents or sleeping equipment. Owen Greenhall, for ELSC, said in written submissions the university was discriminating against the 'race and/or political belief' of protesters as it was only after pro-Palestine actions that it began seeking an injunction, allowing other demonstrations such as those for Ukraine or industrial action. He said an injunction was 'not necessary' and would have a 'chilling effect on political expression at Cambridge'. But Mr Justice Soole said the injunction 'does provide a fair balance between the rights of all parties'. Following the ruling, a spokesperson for the university said: 'The University of Cambridge welcomes today's decision at the High Court. 'We took this action to protect the right of students to graduate and to prevent access to buildings that contain sensitive, confidential information. 'This was never about preventing lawful protest. The injunction safeguards a very small part of the University estate from an occupation that would prevent graduations from going ahead. 'It also protects the right for our staff to work. Protests occur regularly at the university, including a rally held immediately outside Great St Mary's church during the last graduation ceremony while an injunction covering the Senate House, a few yards away, was in place.' Cambridge for Palestine said it 'condemns' the decision, which it described as 'a violent move to criminalise and police our movement'. Anna Ost, senior legal officer at ELSC, said: 'It is more important than ever to resist attempts to shut down protests for Palestinian liberation. 'The extent of the five-year injunction the university originally asked for demonstrated that they were seeking to restrict protests.' She continued: 'Instead of acting urgently to review their investments, the university has stalled and sought to silence their critics with this injunction. 'We remain deeply concerned about the broader trend of universities using legal measures to target solidarity with Palestine.' Ruth Ehrlich, head of advocacy and campaigns at Liberty, which also intervened in the case, said: 'Today's judgment sets a dangerous precedent which will severely restrict protest rights on campus. 'Students have long been at the forefront of movements for social change, whether in opposing apartheid or rising tuition fees. 'It is not right that universities are curbing students' ability to do so, and creating a hostile space for people simply trying to make their voices heard. 'We urge universities to allow students to speak up for what they believe in on campus, and to protect the right to protest.' The University of Cambridge has been approached for comment.
