By Tom Wills
The Badger
29th January 2007
Students are set to defy threats of legal action for peacefully protesting by staging another demonstration in Library Square this Friday.
The Deputy Vice-Chancellor has sent letters to fifty students suspected of taking part in a demonstration in the Library last November warning that the University is considering taking legal action against them. The protestors say the action was peaceful and posed no threat to staff.
Many students who were not involved in the protest last year are outraged at the response by the University, which they say is heavy-handed and a threat to intellectual freedom on campus. A member of the LGBT society said, “This is considerably concerning from a number of perspectives, the most important being that it may hinder our ability to air political views as a society in the future.”
Dan Glass, USSU President, said the issue of free speech was particularly relevant in light of the ongoing selection process for the new Vice-Chancellor. “University council has refused to allow a student on the selection committee for the new VC. This is yet another example of management shutting out the voices of students. The demonstration this Friday will show the University that we are not prepared to let our right to free speech be trampled on and demand that students are given genuine influence in the selection of the new Vice-Chancellor. USSU defends its members all the way.”
The protest organisers are holding an open meeting in Falmer Common Room at 5pm today for anybody who would like to help publicise this Friday’s demonstration.
Library letters threaten action
By Tom Wills
The Badger
15th January 2007
University management is threatening students with disciplinary proceedings and legal action for taking part in a protest in the Library last year.
USSU President Dan Glass has hit back, accusing management of trying to suppress free speech.
A letter sent to fifty students over the Christmas holidays warns, “the University is currently taking steps to identify individuals who were part of the unlawful occupation, following which it may instigate internal disciplinary proceedings and/or seek to action through the courts.” The letter is signed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. The recipients are invited to fill in a reply slip if they wish to deny that they were present in the library after closing time, when the protest took place.
It is thought that the University obtained the names of the students who were in the Library on the night in question by looking at records of who had swiped their Library cards through the barriers after 9pm.
The protest took place in Week Nine last term and demanded longer library opening, more contact hours with lecturers, and an end to the Vice-Chancellor’s support for top-up fees. Management allege that the protest was “threatening” to library staff but organisers say the protest was announced in advance, peaceful, and caused no disruption to the running of the University – taking place from library closing time until the next morning.
The University had obtained a county court injunction in an attempt to outlaw the protest, at a cost of many thousands of pounds. It is unclear whether the University’s threat to pursue students for breaking this injunction has a sound legal basis. However the possibility of disciplinary proceedings remains open.
Alex Sassmannshausen was one of the students who received the letter: “I couldn’t believe it. The University obviously has no interest in giving us what we want, but would rather intimidate us into silence. We should be starting the new term focussing on our studies instead of worrying about being sued by our own university.”
Dan Glass, president of University of Sussex Students’ Union, was critical of the stance taken by management: “This is a shameful attempt to stifle dissenting voices in the student body. Management should be listening to the demands instead of indulging in political point-scoring at the expense of students.”
Responding to the charge that the university was trying to stifle free speech, Paul Layzell, Deputy Vice-Chancellor said, “That's not true, that's not the objective. The objective is to deal with the considerable inconvenience caused to hard-working library staff as a result of the occupation.”
Similar tactics by Lancaster University in 2005 attracted widespread condemnation when it pressed charges against six students who had protested peacefully against a conference on campus involving corporations linked to the arms trade. The so-called “George Fox Six” were convicted of Aggravated Trespass and each given an 18-month conditional discharge and fines totalling £3600.
If disciplinary proceedings go ahead, it will not be the first time Sussex University has taken such action against dissenters. In February 1968, two students were suspended for two months for taking part in a demonstration against the presence of US troops in Vietnam in which red paint was thrown over a visiting American embassy official.
The student union urges any student concerned about disciplinary proceedings to contact the Student Advice Centre in Falmer House.
The Badger
15th January 2007
University management is threatening students with disciplinary proceedings and legal action for taking part in a protest in the Library last year.
USSU President Dan Glass has hit back, accusing management of trying to suppress free speech.
A letter sent to fifty students over the Christmas holidays warns, “the University is currently taking steps to identify individuals who were part of the unlawful occupation, following which it may instigate internal disciplinary proceedings and/or seek to action through the courts.” The letter is signed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. The recipients are invited to fill in a reply slip if they wish to deny that they were present in the library after closing time, when the protest took place.
It is thought that the University obtained the names of the students who were in the Library on the night in question by looking at records of who had swiped their Library cards through the barriers after 9pm.
The protest took place in Week Nine last term and demanded longer library opening, more contact hours with lecturers, and an end to the Vice-Chancellor’s support for top-up fees. Management allege that the protest was “threatening” to library staff but organisers say the protest was announced in advance, peaceful, and caused no disruption to the running of the University – taking place from library closing time until the next morning.
The University had obtained a county court injunction in an attempt to outlaw the protest, at a cost of many thousands of pounds. It is unclear whether the University’s threat to pursue students for breaking this injunction has a sound legal basis. However the possibility of disciplinary proceedings remains open.
Alex Sassmannshausen was one of the students who received the letter: “I couldn’t believe it. The University obviously has no interest in giving us what we want, but would rather intimidate us into silence. We should be starting the new term focussing on our studies instead of worrying about being sued by our own university.”
Dan Glass, president of University of Sussex Students’ Union, was critical of the stance taken by management: “This is a shameful attempt to stifle dissenting voices in the student body. Management should be listening to the demands instead of indulging in political point-scoring at the expense of students.”
Responding to the charge that the university was trying to stifle free speech, Paul Layzell, Deputy Vice-Chancellor said, “That's not true, that's not the objective. The objective is to deal with the considerable inconvenience caused to hard-working library staff as a result of the occupation.”
Similar tactics by Lancaster University in 2005 attracted widespread condemnation when it pressed charges against six students who had protested peacefully against a conference on campus involving corporations linked to the arms trade. The so-called “George Fox Six” were convicted of Aggravated Trespass and each given an 18-month conditional discharge and fines totalling £3600.
If disciplinary proceedings go ahead, it will not be the first time Sussex University has taken such action against dissenters. In February 1968, two students were suspended for two months for taking part in a demonstration against the presence of US troops in Vietnam in which red paint was thrown over a visiting American embassy official.
The student union urges any student concerned about disciplinary proceedings to contact the Student Advice Centre in Falmer House.
High principals
Private Eye
19th January 2007
19th January 2007
The notion that universities should take legal action against their own students for protesting appears to be catching on.
After six students were convicted of aggravated trespass over a protest at Lancaster University (Eyes passim), the University of Sussex is threatening to take students who took part in a peaceful demonstration to court for asking for more learning.
Eighty students occupied the university library in November to demand longer library hours, more contact hours with lecturers and better pay and conditions for staff. During the Christmas break, 50 of them received letters from deputy vice-chancellor Paul Layzell accusing them of breaking an injunction obtained by the university to stop the demonstration. The letter says: "The University is currently taking steps to identify individuals who were part of the unlawful occupation, following which it may instigate internal disciplinary proceedings and/or seek to action [sic] through the courts."
It adds that the university is seeking to recover its legal and security costs "already amounting to several thousand pounds" from the protestors and that if further occupations take place the university will consider closing the library.
Students face action over 'unlawful' sit-in
By Rachel Wareing
Brighton and Hove Argus
12th January 2007
Students suspected of being part of a sit-in protest have been threatened with legal and disciplinary action.
Letters have been sent to 50 students at the University of Sussex asking whether they were part of a group who occupied the campus library.
The protesters defied an injunction to stage the overnight sit-in last November.
Students, some of whom posed for a picture in The Argus, wanted to highlight a number of issues, including top-up fees and lack of contact time with tutors.
The letters, signed by deputy vice-chancellor Paul Layzell, warned that the university would consider disciplining students and recovering legal and staffing costs from them.
One 20-year-old computer sciences undergraduate, who asked to remain anonymous, said students were shocked to receive the letters during the Christmas break.
He said: "It's completely heavy-handed and disproportionate. It shows they are not interested in engaging with the students.
"People are very worried about it, especially the threat of internal disciplinary action. A lot of us have exams coming up and it's an added stress."
He said students held the protest because they had exhausted all other options.
"The main effect of these threats will be to curtail freedom of speech," he said. "Students will think twice about joining protests in the future."
A spokeswoman for the university said the occupation was not supported by the staff or student unions and had been "costly and disruptive".
She said: "We are disappointed that a small number of students have chosen to attack Sussex in this way rather than to work with their student colleagues and the university.
The issues the students raised are either already being addressed in positive discussion with the students' union here or are nothing to do with the university itself.
"As a responsible institution the university is taking steps to identify individuals who were part of the unlawful occupation.
"We reserve the right to consider whether disciplinary action or legal action would then be an appropriate step."
She said the university would discuss what action to take with the students' union, adding: "It is a sad and unnecessary distraction from what we actually are focusing on with the students' union - developing our teaching and learning and improving the wider student experience."
http://www.theargus.co.uk/Applauding our student rebels
Letters
Brighton and Hove Argus
12th December 2006
Brighton and Hove Argus
12th December 2006
Students are revolting. And let's hope they continue to do so in ever increasing numbers.
I was very heartened and encouraged to read the article on the library sit-in at Sussex University (The Argus, November 29). That the students were prepared to do this despite legal intimidation - common practice these days - made it all the more significant.
This was in the same week that a large group of Brighton students went up to Faslane to blockade the Trident base with no fear of arrest. I have also noticed greater numbers of students more regularly attending the weekly protests at EDO.
It is a sad fact that youthful rebellion against the establishment appears to have diminished over the years in this country. Go to many anti-war marches and the average age is quite high - too high. On local marches, despite the high student population in Brighton, there are never that many students. There are a few who do turn up regularly but too few.
I do not know why student radicalism has faded but life as a student must be very different today compared to student life a few decades ago.
The fact that young people end up in massive debt so early in their lives is in itself sad but it also ensnares them into the system - the very system they should be rebelling against.
It may be that the masses of young people who demonstrated en-masse nearly four years ago when the Iraq War broke out have not forgotten the sense of empowerment they felt. Now many of them are of student age, I would hope that they will carry this through university and become much more involved with political issues.
So keep on speaking out, sitting in, blockading and revolting in increasing numbers; you have nothing to lose but your debts.
Glenn Williams, Park Crescent Road, Brighton
Students defy courts
By Katya Mira
Brighton and Hove Argus
30th November 2006
More than 80 students defied a court injunction to stage an overnight sit-in.
Post-graduates and undergraduates from the University of Sussex camped out in the Falmer campus library as part of the student union's Sort Us Out campaign to secure a better deal for students.
The university had secured an injunction to stop them but the protesters turned up at 9.30pm closing time and refused to budge until 9am the next morning.
They are complaining about poor catering services, rises in tuition fees and lack of contact hours with tutors.
Drama student Alice Pickering, 22, said: "We decided to go ahead with the action and risk the fact that they might take legal action against us.
"Recent changes mean that students could be charged up to £9,000 a year and we are very angry.
"People don't get grants like they used to and we all leave university with thousands of pounds of debts.
"It just makes it too hard to survive, especially in Brighton where it is so expensive. I fear that the student population will shrink or become full of rich kids unless something is done."
A university spokeswoman said it had a duty to serve the injunction to protect its staff and the financial running of the faculty. She said it had spent £20,000 on security, extra staffing and legal costs and library workers had had to stay on the premises all night to make sure the students were safe. She also said there had been constructive efforts to look into the students' concerns.
She said: "We are disappointed that a small group of students chose to ignore all opportunities for constructive discussion, and all the good and positive progress which has been made with the student union and instead undertook unlawful occupation which is actively damaging to the interests of students and staff."
The incident followed a protest in February and a vote of no confidence in university management a year ago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
