The University of Leeds has decided to allow Professor James Dickins to retain his emeritus status, despite the official investigation into the case suggesting that he be stripped of the position. As previously reported on the Threats to Freedom page, the controversy dates back to the beginning of the year when Leeds University’s Jewish Society organised an event with the pro-Israel hip-hop artist Noah Shufutinsky.

Professor Dickins, who is a critic of the ongoing war in Gaza, suggested to the Palestine Solidarity Group Whatsapp chat that a “co-ordinated response” was needed from concerned students and staff alike. Somehow, screenshots of these messages made their way onto the website Jewish News. Outrage ensued, a formal student complaint against Professor Dickins was lodged, and an investigation by the university was initiated.

When this investigation concluded, and somehow produced the fatuous recommendation that the most appropriate action was to strip Dickins of his emeritus position at the university, a large number of people and organisations came out in support of the professor, and demanded that his freedom of speech be respected and that he be allowed to retain his position. Among his supporters were 21 fellows of the British Academy, the University and College Union at Leeds, more than 10,000 people who signed a public petition, and of course, the Committee for Academic Freedom.

The pressure from the public appears to have had an impact, as the University of Leeds has now decided not to follow the recommendation of the investigation, but rather to keep Dickins on as an emeritus professor. Naturally, his position should never have been in jeopardy in the first place, but it is nevertheless a good sign that the university realised that you cannot fire people for suggesting the creation of an open-letter in a Whatsapp message.

The victory, however, was only partial. According to a public statement made by Professor Dickins, the university is now proposing to deprive him of the privileges normally associated with the emeritus position. It remains somewhat unclear exactly which privileges the university intends to revoke, but they could include the supervision of PhD-students, use of university facilities, or access to a university email address. In short, the University of Leeds could decide to make Dickins professor emeritus in name only.

This firing-without-firing approach looks most of all like an attempt to retain the initially recommended punishment, while avoiding the public criticism of an outright dismissal. It goes without saying that such measures fall short of what was demanded by the thousands of people who publicly supported Professor Dickins. What matters is not just the retention of the name of Dickins’ position at the university, but also the retention of his duties and privileges as an emeritus professor.

If the University of Leeds truly respects Professor’s Dickins’ freedom of speech, they will rescind the attempts to deprive him of any privileges. The fact is that he was perfectly within his rights to express himself in the way he did, and any disciplinary actions should be out of the question.

Indeed, the university’s own statutes claim to “ensure that members of staff have freedom within the law to question and test received wisdom, and to put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions, without placing themselves in jeopardy of losing their jobs or any privileges they may have at the University”.

In his statement, Dickins mentions that he is seeking legal advice. This is certainly warranted, and regardless of whether or not an employment or other case can successfully be brought against the University of Leeds, it is clear that they have fallen short of their own principles and of the standards to which anyone concerned about freedom of speech should aspire.

The University of Leeds has been approached for comment on this story, but have yet to respond.