Students release an open letter
On Wednesday May 15, the Gaza Solidarity Encampment released an open letter to the University of Sydney. This letter noted that the camp had now reached nearly 90 tents occupying the Quad lawns. They stated they had “not received any word from Sydney University regarding your willingness to meet with us to discuss our demands.” The statement also argued that the University’s offers have been so far “couched in terms of discussing the parameters of our protest and various concerns the university has raised.” They then noted that “today [Wednesday 15 May] is the first time we have received communication from you which explicitly mentions our demands.”
Yet, the communication from the University did not meet the protesters’ demands. The open letter elucidated why the university’s offer to meet in a “private” or “neutral” space is not their goal. The letter stated, “We have no need of your “privacy”, for we have nothing to hide. Nor do we truly believe that anywhere on this campus could be genuinely “neutral”; you remain the people in a position of power over us, with the ability, explicitly threatened in past communication, to discipline us.”
The open letter set out their counter offer, a meeting in one of either following locations at Friday 10 am.
- “An open meeting at our encampment, where all those attending the camp will have the right to witness the meeting.”
- “Or, a town hall meeting open to all staff and students, which takes place at a lecture theatre on campus.”
The open letter explained this further, “If the university is serious about its commitment to free speech, then you will agree to this very reasonable demand. It is only right that the students whose research and fees are sustaining these ties with Israel, should have the right to question them and demand they be cut.”
Freedom of Information request
On Thursday May 16, the encampment submitted a Freedom of Information request to the University of Sydney under the Government Information Public Access (GIPA) Act. In a video, SRC Education Officer Grace Street explains they requested information about “all investments held in the University’s endowment funds and all reports by the University’s Investment and Capital Management Committee”. SRC President Harrison Brennan expanded further, noting the Encampment “wanted to know if the University had any ties to the UN’s list of 97 companies and businesses that conduct business in illegal Israeli settlements, in the occupied Palestinian territory”. SRC Education Officer Shovan Bhattarai reported that the University had responded, who’d stated they’d release the requested information on June 11, just under a month away. Previous requests under GIPA to USyd, have led to the release of “big documents that have 80% of the information blacked out”. Bhattarai concluded; “we want them to disclose those ties fully so that they can be forced to cut every single one last one of them”.
Press conference
The same day, organisers held a press conference at the USyd where organisers spoke of a closed door meeting proposed by University administration with regards to the continuation of the encampment and their demands. This conference was held at the encampment, and attended by mainstream media. Organisers have reiterated their offer to meet at a lecture theatre on campus, tomorrow May 17, at 10 am for “an open town hall meeting.” The aim is to bring together students, staff and organisers, including Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott, to field questions and respond to both side’s demands.
One journalist asked if the USyd encampment plans to occupy buildings like their counterparts in the University of Melbourne and the University of Queensland, with Brennan responding that “we won’t rule that out”.
Brennan also said that he “would not be surprised if and when encampment ends… [and students] will be dragged into disciplinary conduct hearings”, which he referred to as “kangaroo courts” due to their strict confidentiality, and tendency to occur without the general public’s knowledge.
As for the exchange of emails and letters to encampment organisers, Deaglan Godwin, SRC Vice-President stated that “Mark Scott is a PR man”, who is refusing to meet in public locations. He spoke to the “insistence of university on privacy”, rejecting the argument that “no substantive discussion” will occur in public forums and said that organisers will keep the invitation to the university open.
In response to a journalist asking about whether the communication will sour relations between the camp and the University, Bhattarai said that “what’s currently souring is the fact our uni continues to have ties to weapons companies”. Bhattarai expanded, saying it would be an “indictment on the people who run this university if things turn sour”.
University’s email response
At 3.32pm, as the press conference was taking place, Vice-Chancellor Mark Scott, responded to the open letter in a university-wide email.
“We will continue to take a reasonable and proportionate approach to any alleged misconduct and deal with unacceptable conduct on a case-by-case basis, consistent with our approach of de-escalation”, Scott said.
Unlike other emails, there is mention of counter-protestors “allegedly engaging in intimidatory behaviour towards the encampment overnight”, with the university cooperating with police to investigate this further. There is also a direct use of “Israel and Palestine”, and not just a reference to the “conflict in the Middle East”.
Scott praised conversations with the Sydney University Postgraduate Representative Association (SUPRA), and the “student-led” University of Sydney Union (USU), singling out the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) and Sydney University Muslim Students’ Association (SUMSA) for not engaging with the University. He then re-extended the offer to meet in a “private and neutral place where meaningful discussions can take place.”
The email also noted an invitation to the USyd branch of the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) to speak to Scott and Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor Annemarie Jagose after the passing of a motion in favour of a full academic institutional boycott of Israel. Scott concluded his remarks via email by saying that “we can only progress towards any resolution through genuine two-way discussions.”
More to come.
