In turning to the Western Cape High Court to set aside two resolutions passed at UCT in relation to the Gaza conflict, a historical studies professor at the institution says the decisions limit academic freedom and Council failed to consider an array of relevant considerations before passing the resolutions.
In turning to the Western Cape High Court to set aside two resolutions passed at UCT in relation to the Gaza conflict, a historical studies professor at the institution says the decisions limit academic freedom and Council failed to consider an array of relevant considerations before passing the resolutions.
The resolutions on the destruction of scholarship and education in Gaza and regarding research collaborations with members of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the wider Israeli military establishment, were passed in June by majority votes.
In terms of the resolutions, no UCT academic may enter into relations, or continue any relations with, any research group and or network whose author affiliations are with the IDF, and or the broader Israeli military establishment.
In his review application, humanities professor Adam Mendelsohn stated that the Council decided to pass the resolutions in an irrational manner.
“The Council failed to consider an array of relevant considerations before passing the resolutions, including the resolutions' financial, relational and reputational implications for UCT.
“The resolutions are not linked rationally to any legitimate purpose.
The purpose of the resolutions appear to be to prevent UCT’S affiliation with or complicity in unlawful conduct by the Israel Defense Forces, and to pressure the IDF to act lawfully. The resolutions do not and cannot be achieved. The Council lacked the power to pass these resolutions.
“In 2010, the Council adopted a policy regulating when it may take positions on issues of public importance.
The two resolutions passed by the Council do not comply with this policy.
“The Council's decisions contravene its own policy, making it unlawful.” “The resolutions limit academic freedom in two ways. One, the most obvious way, the resolutions preclude academics from ‘entering relations’ with certain groups or networks,” said Mendelsohn.
He said even if Council should have had the power to pass the resolutions, it would have had to exercise that power in a manner that was procedurally fair.
UCT spokesperson Elijah Moholola said: “UCT has noted the review application filed in the Western Cape High Court by an academic staff member at the institution. UCT is considering the matter and will respond through the relevant processes.”
The SA Zionist Federation (SAZF) welcomed the action, saying the Council’s decision was irrational and would severely impact UCT’s ability to fund-raise, limit academic freedom and worsen the hostile environment for Jewish students at UCT.
Palestine Solidarity Campaign co-ordinator, Professor Usuf Chikte, said the opposition from proZionist groups to UCT’s decision to boycott Israeli universities and academics is not unexpected, “given the historical connections between some Zionist groups and the apartheid regime in SA”.
“It is concerning that some individuals at UCT are challenging the university’s progressive resolutions, despite the well-documented impact of Israel’s actions on Palestinian education.
This includes the arrest, detention, and killing of educational staff and students, as well as the destruction of educational infrastructure.” Chikte said UCT’s decision to boycott Israeli universities and academics was a principled stance that aligns with its commitment to human rights, social justice, and academic freedom.
Cape Times
Related Topics: