UCSA reprimands political club for apparent policy breaches – details of investigation still under wraps

Thursdays in Black UC is a branch of the national anti-violence campaign Thursdays in Black. Source: Charlotte Thornton.

It’s been five months since anti-violence political club Thursdays in Black UC (TiBUC) received a formal complaint regarding an Instagram post. Two decisions and numerous emails later, their relationship with the University of Canterbury Students’ Association (UCSA) executive has “soured significantly”.

In the December 5 post, TiBUC called for a ceasefire in Gaza. This post included the phrase “from the river to the sea”.

They made another post the next day, which clarified their intentions behind their use of the phrase.

On December 19, TiBUC received a formal complaint. The UCSA began an investigation.

On February 8, the UCSA sent TiBUC a memo detailing their findings. The UCSA ruled that TiBUC had breached inclusion and equality-focused sections of the Clubs Code of Conduct, the Affilliation Policy, and TiBUC’s own Constitution.

They considered TiBUC as “failing to acknowledge the complexities of the conflict and… the trauma also faced by Israeli and Jewish students”. The decision did not deem TiBUC’s research on Gaza to be thorough, and it said that TiBUC had not “considered all points of view”.

TiBUC’s use of “from the river to the sea” was found not to have breached the Clubs Code of Conduct clause on hate speech.

The outcome: a breach of the Clubs Code of Conduct was to be recorded, which rendered TiBUC ineligible for the Supreme Club Awards; for TiBUC to “be required to undertake education on the topic” before posting about Palestine again; and for TiBUC to ensure “all future posts have been thoroughly considered” to avoid further breaches.

TiBUC then sent the UCSA a response, which asked for clarification and reversal of the outcome.

This response was co-signed by groups in support of TiBUC, including other students’ associations and other UC clubs.

This included UC Climate Action Club (UC CAC), who contacted Canta to express support for TiBUC.

“It’s worrying that UCSA would abandon its legacy of embracing student political expression. It’s even more worrying that UCSA will stifle student activism for Palestine, when students worldwide are leading campus movements,” they said.

TiBUC’s questions to the UCSA went unanswered, but they received a second outcome on March 7 which replaced the first.

The policy breach findings remained, but the education requirement was gone and the UCSA Executive had chosen to override the automatic ineligibility for the Supreme Club Awards.

In response to questions from Canta, UCSA President Luc MacKay said, “We support all clubs' rights to make political statements provided it is done so in accordance with the Clubs' Code of Conduct.”

He said the UCSA take complaints “very seriously” and follow their Constitution and Clubs Code of Conduct. He said, “I cannot comment on the specifics of our thorough confidential investigation.”

TiBUC told Canta that they did not sign any confidentiality or non-disclosure agreements with the UCSA, and that to their knowledge, the only confidential information was the identity of the complainant.

TiBUC sent a response to the UCSA on February 20. Source: Supplied / Thursdays in Black UC.

Dr Jeremy Moses, Associate Professor in Political Science and International Relations at UC, was contacted by TiBUC in February and encouraged them to write a response to the UCSA’s first outcome.

In addition, he and “between 10 and 15 other academics” wrote a letter in support of TiBUC, which said the decision would have an impact on academics and called on the UCSA to support their constituent clubs. It was added to evidence but later ruled “irrelevant”.

MacKay said that “no clubs have disaffiliated nor received any change in treatment throughout this process”. Nonetheless, clubs have been affected.

One of the newest clubs at UC, the Palestine Peace Society (PPSOC), expressed that the situation “has definitely made us aware of our speech”.

TiBUC have deleted both December posts, and “have taken a step back from posting anything vaguely political to protect our executive”.

While TiBUC’s behaviour has changed, their stance has not. “If anything, we have progressively felt more emboldened and strong on our position due to people coming up to [us] at events to express their support for us during this lengthy process.

They added that some clubs have asked to see a copy of the UCSA’s outcomes to check what they’re able to post without penalty.

UC CAC told Canta that they believe the UCSA’s actions are “limiting the free expression of affiliated student clubs,” and that they have concerns for how climate activism might be treated in future.

PPSOC “stands in solidarity with TiB and fundamentally disagrees with the UCSA’s ruling”.

Moses said, “This decision reinforces that sense that you should be fearful about saying anything critical of Israel, or… repeating slogans in favor of Palestinians. That's one of the consequences… it has that silencing effect.”

Activist John Minto, National Chair for the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa, called the ruling “unconscionable”.

“Where’s the question of sensitivity towards Palestinian students? […] Palestinians are demanding their freedom, and they have every right to demand it, and UCSA has no right to stand in their way,” Minto added.

MacKay was asked twice by Canta about why the situation has not appeared in any publicly available documents, but he did not provide an answer.

As of May 12, there is no record of this investigation on the UCSA’s website. The only available Executive Minutes document is for a February 26 meeting.