Letters
Keble Tribunal
Dear Sir,
I am dismayed by the tone of reporting by Rob Lewis and the purported refutation by Mohsin Zaidi (The Oxford Student, April 21, 2005) regarding the findings of racism against Keble and cannot let it go unchallenged. Rob Lewis does a disservice to journalism by engaging in editorialising and asking Diamond Versi to respond to issues already adjudicated by a tribunal.
His role is not to retry or cross-examine Mr Versi but to report the story; he is free to criticise the decision and/or the process but to ask Mr. Versi to again prove his case is inappropriate and unfair. Mr. Versi, as required by law, has proven his case and does not need to do so again in the pages of a newspaper. The response by Mr. Zaidi is an embarrassingly naïve piece of claptrap.
How he can be so unequivocal is beyond me; he believes himself an ‘authority’ on the matter – he is no such thing. Mr. Zaidi, without being privy to the legal proceedings, comes out swinging against the unanimous findings of the Tribunal. Certainly, he is entitled to criticise but he is no position to refute findings of fact, at least not in such cavalier and logically suspect a manner.
For example, Mr Zaidi claims that he personally has never suffered racism at Keble or at the hands of Roger Boden; further, neither have his minority friends. And that is sufficient to prove his case and besides, he adds, Mr Boden is so helpful and nice. Granted – but that does not preclude Mr. Boden from acting in a racist manner; granted he may treat Mr. Zaidi and friends with due respect, but that does not mean Mr Versi was accorded the same respect.
Moreover, a college bursar has little authority over students but a great deal of power over staff as evidenced by the fact that Mr Versi, an employee with 14 years service, was restructured out of a job. Mr. Zaidi’s logic is really quite untenable. Mr. Zaidi has not experienced racism at Keble; his ethnic friends have not experienced racism; therefore racism does not exist at Keble. However faulty logic is not the least of Mr Zaidi’s sins – he continues his tirade by accusing Mr.
Versi of ‘exaggeration’ (how does he know this?) and of ‘headline-grabbing’ and causing damage to his ‘own’ community . There are many reasons why blaming the victim is particularly offensive, not the least is that it allows the offender to deflect/avoid responsibility: it’s not the offender’s fault that Mr Versi has suffered racism; he suffered racism because he is Asian, and so it goes. Mr Zaidi deplores Mr Versi for publicising the matter.
What does he want Mr Versi to do – shut up like a good chap and accept racism? I, for one, am pleased that Mr. Versi fought back. It is disappointing that Keble sees no need for an enlightened approach. Instead, they have elected to blame the victim and deny the existence of racism. By all means appeal the decision but do take a long hard look in the mirror.
PARNESH SHARMA CENTRE FOR SOCIO-LEGAL STUDIES ORIEL COLLEGE
Green Party
Dear Sir,
I was surprised to see that your election coverage in 1st week’s edition contained next to no mention of the Green Party. Your journalists seem to have had time to follow the UKIP candidate around Oxford, despite your own poll showing that he has insignificant support among the student body. On the other hand, the Greens, despite having won two recent local elections in predominantly student areas with around 35 per cent of the vote on each occasion, don’t get a look-in.
Your readers may be interested to know that, particularly in the County Council elections on May 5th, the race is neck-and-neck between Labour and the Greens. Oxfordshire Green Party is the strongest in the country - but to read The Oxford Student, you wouldn’t know that we exist. I’d urge all students to check out our website at www.greenoxford. com and look at our manifesto for themselves.
CLLR MATT SELLWOOD, NEW COLLEGE AND GREEN PARTY
Union Sexism
Dear Sir,
I am writing in response to last week’s letter from Ms Kathleen Bottriell expressing her dismay at the all-male Union debate on the general election. She states: “it seems absurd that not one of the seven of the panel would be female."
Why does that strike her as absurd? I can assure Ms Bottriell that I issued invitations to politicians, both men and women, in proportion to their numbers in Parliament; in the first place, I received positive responses only from men in time for our deadline, and in the second, there are fewer women to invite.
There are criticisms to be made of this state of affairs but I am afraid they are not ones that can be levelled at the Oxford Union, an organisation of which I am the first male President for a year, which is co-hosting an event with OxWiP in the next two weeks.
A worthy occasion though that evening may be, a discussion between fellow students will not allow attendees to benefit from the same expertise and depth of knowledge as Tuesday’s debate, and Ms Bottriell’s case is absolutely not furthered by making trite and naïve criticisms of fellow Oxford societies that would be better directed towards society at large.
RICHARD TYDEMAN PRESIDENT, OXFORD UNION
5th May 2005