"An absolute disgrace"
THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY Proctors have been severely criticised by OUSU President Kirsty McNeill after the trials of students involved in the Bodleian Divinity Hall occupation apparently descended into "farce".
Dozens of students involved in the Fees and Funding protests were summoned to hearings in 8th week of last term. They were charged with minor university offences which carried a maximum penalty of £65. OUSU President Kirsty McNeill and Finance and Funding Co-Chair Will Straw have both had their hearings adjourned. The Proctors have however been criticised by OUSU for a catalogue of mistakes and judicial anomalies.
"The Proctors' handling of this issue has been an absolute disgrace," stated McNeill, "Oxford may be an ancient University but they don't even seem to have heard of the Magna Carta. Some of the basic principles of British justice have been violated by the Proctors. There is no presumption of innocence until proven guilty and the burden of proof is only on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt". McNeill further believes that the variety of fines allocated to protesters, from £30 to the maximum £65 "appeared to depend on how 'sorry' they looked". While stating that she had no doubt that the individual Proctors were "fantastic", the OUSU President felt that they were severely hindered as a "pseudo judicial process was being administered by people without judicial training".
Robin Sivapalan, of Somerville College, supported McNeill's allegations. He criticised the Proctors not only for failing to provide OUSU with the names of those they were charging, but also for the evidence they used against protesters. Sivapalan believes that the Proctors compensated for scanty evidence, as they only had CCTV footage of the Bodleian steps, by "picking on people". He provided the example of Sonia Sodha, who Sivapalan believes was hardly at occupation, but sent an email about it and so was tried at the Proctors Court.
A University spokesperson responded to the allegations, stating that "students who occupy University building are immediately informed of the consequence of their actions. They are told that they are obstructing teaching and research, for staff and students, and they are told to expect to appear in front of the Proctors' Court". In defence of the criticisms of the trials, the spokesperson outlined that the protesters both had a right to representation at the hearing, as well as the right to be accompanied by a senior member of their College. "The Proctors," maintained the University, "would always listen fairly to the representations of students".
26th Apr 2001