University of Birmingham students facing disciplinary hearing over pro-Palestine activism

Mariyah Ali and Antonia Listrat. (Supplied)
Short Url
Updated 04 April 2025
Follow

University of Birmingham students facing disciplinary hearing over pro-Palestine activism

  • Student Antonia Listrat: ‘Funding genocide is violent; protesting genocide is peaceful’
  • Legal rights group sounds alarm over ‘nationwide crackdown’ on solidarity with Palestinians

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.”

Arab News contacted the University of Birmingham for comment.

In response, a spokesperson for the university said: “The University of Birmingham is a large community representing a wide range of backgrounds and views. We have a strong and longstanding commitment to freedom of speech and academic freedom, supported by our code of practice. Through this we regularly facilitate debates and activities (such as rallies) on sensitive but important topics. This year, that has included signing off many events on a range of issues, including, for example, in relation to Palestine.
 
“We have never, and would never, act against any member of our community because of the views they lawfully hold or express. However, it is important that the university is a safe and welcoming space for the entire community, so when there is any complaint or allegation of misconduct — for example, threatening, intimidating or offensive behaviour or language, harassment, or bullying — we will take action in line with our regulations. We are unable to comment on matters involving individual students.

“The university is committed to maintaining high environmental, social and governance standards across our investment portfolios, the full details of which can be found transparently on our website which is regularly updated. We are a signatory to the UN Principles for Responsible Investment, incorporating ESG factors in our investments.”


EU leaders work into the night to ease Belgian fears of Russian retaliation over a loan to Ukraine

Updated 58 min 32 sec ago
Follow

EU leaders work into the night to ease Belgian fears of Russian retaliation over a loan to Ukraine

BRUSSELS: European Union leaders worked into the night on Thursday, seeking to reassure Belgium that they would provide guarantees to protect it from Russian retaliation if it backs a massive loan for Ukraine. Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky meanwhile pleaded for a quick decision to keep Ukraine afloat in the new year.
At a summit in Brussels with high stakes for both the EU and Ukraine, leaders of the 27-nation bloc discussed how best to use tens of billions of euros in frozen Russian assets to underwrite a loan to meet Ukraine’s military and financial needs over the next two years.
The bulk of the assets — some 193 billion euros  as of September — are held in the Brussels-based financial clearing house Euroclear. Russia’s Central Bank launched a lawsuit against Euroclear last week.
“Give me a parachute and we’ll all jump together,” Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever told lawmakers ahead of the summit. “If we have confidence in the parachute that shouldn’t be a problem.”
Belgian concerns over Russian pressure
Belgium fears that Russia will strike back and wants the bloc to borrow the money on international markets. It says frozen assets held in other European countries should be thrown into the pot as well, and that its partners should guarantee that Euroclear will have the funds it needs should it come under legal attack.
An estimated 25 billion euros  in Russian assets are frozen in banks and financial institutions in other EU countries, including France, Germany and Luxembourg.
The Russian Central Bank’s lawsuit ramped up pressure on Belgium and its EU partners ahead of the summit.
The “reparations loan” plan would see the EU lend 90 billion euros  to Ukraine. Countries like the United Kingdom, which said Thursday it is prepared to share the risk, as well as Canada and Norway would help make up any shortfall.
Russia’s claim to the assets would still stand, but the assets would remain locked away at least until the Kremlin ends its war on Ukraine and pays for the massive damage it caused.
In mapping out the loan plan, the European Commission set up safeguards to protect Belgium, but De Wever remained unconvinced and EU envoys were working late on Thursday to address his concerns.
Zelensky describes it as a moral question

Soon after arriving in Brussels, the Ukrainian president sat down with the Belgian prime minister to make his case for freeing up the frozen funds. The war-ravaged country is at risk of bankruptcy and needs new money by spring.
“Ukraine has the right to this money because Russia is destroying us, and to use these assets against these attacks is absolutely just,” Zelensky told a news conference.
In an appeal to Belgian citizens who share their leader’s worries about retaliation, Zelensky said: “One can fear certain legal steps in courts from the Russian Federation, but it’s not as scary as when Russia is at your borders.”
“So while Ukraine is defending Europe, you must help Ukraine,” he said.
Allies maintain support for Ukraine
Whatever method they use, the leaders have pledged to meet most of Ukraine’s needs in 2026 and 2027. The International Monetary Fund estimates that would amount to 137 billion euros .
“We have to find a solution today,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told reporters. EU Council President António Costa, who is chairing the meeting, vowed to keep leaders negotiating until an agreement is reached, even if it takes days.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said it was a case of sending “either money today or blood tomorrow” to help Ukraine.
If enough countries object, the plan could be blocked. There is no majority support for a plan B of raising the funds on international markets, although that too was being discussed at the summit.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that he hopes Belgium’s concerns can be addressed.
“The reactions of the Russian president in recent hours show how necessary this is. In my view, this is indeed the only option. We are basically faced with the choice of using European debt or Russian assets for Ukraine, and my opinion is clear: We must use the Russian assets.”
Hungary and Slovakia oppose a reparations loan. Apart from Belgium, Bulgaria, Italy and Malta are also undecided.
“I would not like a European Union in war,” said Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who sees himself as a peacemaker. He’s also Russian President Vladimir Putin’s closest ally in Europe. “To give money means war.”
Orbán described the loan plan as a “dead end.”
High stakes for the EU

The outcome of the summit has significant ramifications for Europe’s place in negotiations to end the war. The United States wants assurances that the Europeans are intent on supporting Ukraine financially and backing it militarily — even as negotiations to end the war drag on without substantial results.
The loan plan in particular also poses important challenges to the way the bloc goes about its business. Should a two-thirds majority of EU leaders decide to impose the scheme on Belgium, which has most to lose, the impact on decision-making in Europe would be profound.
The EU depends on consensus, and finding voting majorities and avoiding vetoes in the future could become infinitely more complex if one of the EU’s founding members is forced to weather an attack on its interests by its very own partners.
De Wever too must weigh whether the cost of holding out against a majority is worth the hit his government’s credibility would take in Europe.
Whatever is decided, the process does not end at this summit. Legal experts would have to convert any political deal into a workable agreement, and some national parliaments may have to weigh in before the loan money could start flowing to Ukraine.