In early April, student activists at the University of Sydney (USyd) campus received official complaint letters from USyd Management, alleging that they had contravened the Campus Access Policy (CAP) by participating in campus protests.
Student Representative Council (SRC) First Nations Officer and USU Board Director Ethan Floyd received a letter from management on April 2nd. The letter referenced a Students Against War (SAW) protest held on 26th March in front of the F23 Building, at which Floyd spoke as an invited speaker.
The letter said that “The Student Affairs Unit has received a complaint concerning your conduct in relation to an on-campus protest, which is alleged to have breached the University’s [CAP]”. It also stated that, “You were considered to be an organiser of the following protest, and therefore, you were required to notify the University of the planned demonstrations at the earliest opportunity.”
Notably, Floyd is unaffiliated with SAW and was not an organiser of the relevant protest.
In response to questioning over the error, a University spokesperson provided the following statement:
“We recently sent some reminders about our expectations of behaviour in relation to the requirements of our Campus Access Policy – specifically the requirement to notify the University about future events to be held on University lands.”
The statement does not address the misidentification of organisers or even what constitutes an ‘organiser’ by University management standards.
This represents the latest crackdown on campus activism by USyd Management. It seems identified individuals can now face disciplinary action, regardless of the confirmation of their involvement in activities on campus which allegedly violate the CAP.
Honi requested comment from Floyd, who said, “Apparently, simply being an invited speaker is enough to earn you a misconduct warning these days. I can only assume they’re identifying the “ringleaders” of these protests by throwing darts at a list of known student activists.
But beyond the absurdity, this is part of a broader trend: the University is weaponising its new anti-protest policies to intimidate and silence students and staff with spurious accusations of misconduct. The [CAP] is so vague and overreaching that it allows them to make up ‘breaches’ as they go. The fact that I’ve received this letter at all proves how arbitrary and punitive this system is.
We have the right to protest. We have the right to speak out. And no amount of bureaucratic hand-waving from University management is going to change that.”
Honi notes the selective application of the CAP, considering two pro-life extremists were not removed from campus mid last week despite posing a direct threat to the wellbeing of the students on campus.
Honi asks any students with further information to email [email protected]
