Case Profile: LSE 7

 
Summary
On 7 July 2024, a group of students and members of the London School of Economics (LSE) community  held a protest against the LSE’s complicity in the genocide in Gaza, through its multi-million pound investments in Isreali arms firms. This protest called on the LSE to divest from these firms. In response to this legitimate  protest, the LSE singled out 7 students and not only banned them from campus, but also initiated disciplinary proceedings against them. In doing so, the LSE denied these fee-paying students access to campus services including medical, mental health services, and any student facilities needed to complete their exams and dissertation submissions. Many of these students were forced to defer their studies as a result, and still face the prospect of further disciplinary action, which continues to have a material impact on their ability to continue studying at the university.

The LSE continues to hold these students in limbo, whilst using pressure tactics to silence wider student support for the #LSE7.

Background: the LSE and Palestine Solidarity

Following the start of the genocide in Gaza in October 2023, the Palestine society at the LSE reached out to school management and demanded a meeting regarding the university’s unethical investments. The LSE told students that the investments are not about ethics but about risk, they said it was necessary to invest in weapons because of a concern in case they “get attacked”. The management team then cut contact with the students and denied any further meetings with them.
LSE students and staff jointly compiled a report,  documenting the LSE’s financial investments in companies supplying arms to Israel. This report, which is over 100 pages,  revealed that the LSE held £48 million worth of assets in 13 companies that contributed directly to the genocide of Palestinians, including the supply of F-15 fighter jets and financial holdings in at least four companies that were on a UN list of companies directly complicit in expanding illegal Israeli settlements.
LSE students then launched their encampment and occupied the Marshall building, calling for divestment, joining hundreds of other encampments across the UK and internationally. The encampment at LSE, which saw the students occupy a university building, lasted for a total of 34 days. 

In order to disrupt and dismantle the protest, the LSE took legal action against the encampment, and evicted the students with the presence of bailiffs and security staff, on Eid day, the 17th of June 2024.
On Tuesday the 4th of June 2024, a referendum was held at the LSE Student Union, that asked whether the Student Union body should engage with the university’s senior leadership to advocate for full and meaningful divestment, and ensure that the LSE’s investment portfolio reflected the values of its student body. The motion saw a record student turnout and passed with a clear majority - 89% in favour.

Despite the motion being overwhelmingly voted for, the LSE continues to hold investments in weapons manufacturing firms and no steps have been taken to implement the calls and demands of its own student body. In fact, the LSE senior management have voted to continue their investments, in complete disregard of and contrary to the referendum outcome.

LSE Student Protest following the encampment 

On 7 July 2024, students from the LSE engaged their right to protest by holding a small protest action on university grounds. The protest lasted a total of 15 minutes, during which time the students called on the LSE to divest from arms companies - holding banners and chanting slogans to call attention to the LSE’s investments in genocide and arms manufacturing. 
The action was held at the university’s student centre so that incoming and fee-paying summer school students would be aware of how their student fees were being used, and could make conscious and informed decisions about the institutions they might choose to study at going forward.

Banned from Campus

Eight days after this, on the 15th of July 2024, the LSE Harassment Management group issued  formal letters to seven students, accusing them of harassment, bullying, disruption of a school event, and causing fear and distress to staff and students. The seven students were told that as a result of this they were now banned from campus.
Their student cards were immediately deactivated and they were disallowed from stepping foot on campus. This meant they could neither see their GP nor speak to mental health/wellbeing staff and had no means of obtaining help and support. Some students suffered personal loss and were denied access to support networks. Many others suffered extreme stress, exacerbating existing health conditions and requiring emergency medical attention. 

Their studies were also derailed by these measures. Each student had dissertation submission and exam deadlines to meet, but as a result of not being allowed access to the campus library or student study spaces, a number of them were forced to defer their studies by a full semester or entirely change the subject of their theses.

The students were given just five days to appeal these measures and had to reveal sensitive personal details about their disabilities, mental/physical health needs, religious needs and academic needs in order to request to have their bans eased, and to be allowed conditional access to campus.

Following repeated requests to the university, the students were eventually granted very limited access to campus under stringent conditions, including having access to the library but only where security staff allowed entry and exit, as well as having to notify the university of the specific books that they would be reviewing.

The lack of access to academic services and resultant difficulties in meeting requisite deadlines, caused serious visa implications for the students - almost all of whom were international students. This was exacerbated by the denial of in-person access to visa services at the university.

The students have now been subject to these restrictive bans for more than three months and will remain subject to them for the foreseeable future, until their disciplinary processes have concluded.

Disciplinary Process: linking Palestine protest with terrorism
 
Just over two weeks after the campus bans, the 7 LSE students were informed that they would also be subject to formal disciplinary proceedings, and investigation meetings would be held with them about breaches of student policy resulting from their protest action.  
 
The LSE’s narrative of events painted the students as a mob who stormed the university, intimidating students by wearing keffiyehs and using megaphones to chant.

Their “evidence” was constituted of a handful of Islamophobic and inflammatory “witness statements” that depicted students and staff being “terrified”, afraid for their life, and suffering from “ear infections” due to the use of megaphones. 

The university went so far as to associate the divestment and pro-Palestine action with terrorism, drawing attention to the fact that the protest was held on 7th July and (coincidentally) fell on the anniversary of the 7/7 London bombings.

In a correspondence to the students in August 2024, the Vice President of the university wrote: 
“…with a number of LSE staff members and attending students feeling distressed, fearful and alarmed. This was particularly so, given the 7 July 2024 was the anniversary of the London terror attack. Individuals genuinely feared there was a further attack taking place.”

The comparison between the two events was played up by the university in order to bolster their grounds for disciplinary action and provide false credence to their allegations.

Disciplinary Hearings: breaches of process and policy 

The university’s “evidence”, released to the students after three months, included innocuous CCTV footage of the students walking around campus on the day of the protest and a number of testimonies/witness statements gathered by the university, which had never been verified or investigated for their accuracy. No CCTV “evidence” was presented of the protest itself.

Following months of delays and missed deadlines, the students were finally called in for their investigation meetings in October. Just a day before these scheduled hearings, the university suddenly replaced the initial investigating officer with a barrister who had been providing legal advice/counsel on the case. As these were not legal proceedings, but simply internal disciplinary investigations, the appointment of legal counsel was a move designed to intimidate the students.

While no outcome has yet formally been communicated to the students, it has been revealed that the LSE had - without waiting for the students’ written submissions - already made the internal decision to escalate the matter to a full disciplinary panel. If proven, this decision has undermined the entire disciplinary process and effectively denied the students any chance at a fair and impartial hearing.

Throughout the process, and despite proclamations of support for “free speech” and the right to protest, the LSE has consistently acted in bad faith.

Failure to uphold a duty of care:
1. No measures were put in place to reduce the impact on the students’ learning/studying as a result of their campus bans. It was determined that denying students access to library services would not seriously disrupt their studies. 
2. No measures were put in place to mitigate the impact on students’ health and wellbeing and despite prior awareness of students’ medical conditions and needs, no efforts were made to ensure the necessary support services were available.  
3. The bans have resulted in some of the seven students being bullied and harassed while on campus. No action has been taken to ensure their safety and security. 

Changes of policy and lack of good faith:
1. While strict deadlines were put in place for meetings and appeals, the LSE continually failed to adhere to these timelines, consistently failing to provide clarity and/or notify students of any changes.
2. The LSE policy dictates that the Investigating Officer for the students’ disciplinary meetings must be a member of the LSE staff. By authorising an external barrister to conduct the investigations the LSE was in clear breach of the terms of its own policy.
3. The LSE CCTV policy allowed for the use of CCTV as evidence, exclusively in instances of potential criminality. Following the student protest action, and before their disciplinary meetings, the LSE removed this policy from its website without notice, amending it to allow for the use of CCTV evidence in all cases. 

Conflict of interest: 
An LSE employee who submitted a “witness statement” against the seven students, was also a member of the Harassment Management group committee that decided to impose the blanket campus bans on the students.

Conflict of interest: 
An LSE employee who submitted a “witness statement” against the seven students, was also a member of the Harassment Management group committee that decided to impose the blanket campus bans on the students.

The LSE Response: Silencing and intimidation

The LSE has persistently made efforts to silence any criticism of its handling of the student protest and has made repeated attempts to intimidate students speaking in favour of, or in solidarity with, the seven students.

A petition signed by over 1250 individuals, against the LSE’s treatment of the students, was sent to the university on the 16th of October 2024. The university responded by sending each of the signatories of the petition a personal email disputing the claims made, reiterating the unfounded allegations contained within the witness statements, and reaffirming the university’s so-called commitment to protecting and upholding the right to protest and freedom of speech. 

The LSE has publicly denied making any association between the divestment protest and the 7/7 London bombing, despite clear evidence to the contrary. In fact, in an early communication to the students about their campus bans, the university specifically cited the 7/7 attack anniversary as a contributing factor, justifying the denial of appeal to the measures.

International & Public support:

The LSE case has received widespread media attention and overwhelming public support. Gina Romero, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of peaceful assembly and of association recently published a damning criticism of the LSE’s suppression of student activism and pro-Palestine support, and called for universities to stop repressing pro-Palestinian activism, and safeguard the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association on campuses in relation to international solidarity with Palestine. 

In addition to this, she has written to the LSE directly, appealing for them to reconsider and drop the disciplinary action against the students.

Separately, the students have been offered legal support from renowned international lawyers and human rights organisations, notwithstanding the wider support and solidarity of the UK student body.

Call to Action: to support the #LSE7 and call on the LSE to halt its unjustified attack on these students, please sign the petition here: https://t.co/Hcasvb1tzY