BFSP Statement on free speech governance failures at Sussex University
(02.05.25) We wrote to all universities and the Office for Students (OfS), impressing on them the need to review and revise their policies to ensure they did not restrict lawful speech, and the likely penalties if they failed to do so. We attach a statement by our associated campaign, Best Free Speech Practice, about the recent fines by the OfS on Sussex for their governance failures in connection with the Kathleen Stock case.
Sussex hit with huge fines for free speech governance failures
(14.04.2025) The Office for Students (OfS) has fined the University of Sussex £585,000 for freedom of speech and academic freedom failures. This is an excellent and highly significant development for freedom of speech protection.
Kathleen Stock was a philosophy professor at the University. She holds “gender critical” beliefs: that biological sex is real, important, and immutable. In 2021, Stock was subject to an organised campaign by students and staff, who demanded that the university sack her for gender critical beliefs. She received numerous death threats and was advised by the police that she might need security to go into the university. Eventually, she resigned.
The OfS can investigate whether universities are in breach of their “conditions of registration”: conditions which universities must meet in order to retain their degree awarding powers.
The OfS investigated Sussex and found it had breached two conditions. Sussex breached:
- A condition (E1) which requires the governing documents of universities to uphold freedom of speech and academic freedom. This was because its “Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement” required academics to “positively represent trans people and trans lives”, and contained prohibitions against (undefined) “stereotypical assumptions about trans people” and “transphobic propaganda”.
- A condition (E2) which relates to governance procedures, because subsidiary university bodies approved the “Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement”, along with a number of other important policy documents, despite not having the delegated authority to do so.
Vice Chancellor Professor Roseneil has stated “the behaviour of the OfS sets a dangerous precedent and constitutes serious regulatory overreach in service of a politically motivated inquiry”. Sussex have begun judicial review proceedings.
We wrote to Sussex in February 2023 about compliance issues we raised on this subject. Sussex refused to engage seriously. See more here
The OfS’ report and fine are a major development in free speech protection with significance far beyond the University of Sussex.
- OfS has got serious: First, and most importantly, the report demonstrates that the OfS is now serious about free speech protection and will take action against universities which fail to protect free speech. The fine of £585,000 is the largest the OfS has ever issued.
- Universities need to review their policies: Second, multiple other universities have policies which are, in the offending sections, identical or extremely similar to Sussex’s. The Committee for Academic Freedom has identified 29 universities with such policies, all of which now need to review their policies to ensure that they comply with their regulatory obligations and do not restrict lawful speech. This OfS report has to precipitate a sector wide review of their policies, beyond trans matters, to ensure free speech compliance.
- Dangers of taking policies from external providers: Third, Sussex created its “Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy Statement” by copying verbatim the offending passages from a template provided by the education charity Advance HE. The case of Sussex is therefore a powerful argument that universities must not outsource their governing policies, which determine the culture of a university and how it is run, to external organisations such as Advance HE and Stonewall. They have to take responsibility for their own compliance.
We will shortly be writing to all universities, impressing on them the need to review and revise their policies to ensure they do not restrict lawful speech, and the likely penalties if they fail to do so.
Update: Free Speech concerns at Sussex fall on deaf ears
(18.05.23) On 6 April, AFFS finally received a reply from Sussex Vice Chancellor, Professor Sasha Roseneil to its free speech concerns explained in its detailed letter of 10 February 2023 (see our original letter here). As can be seen here, Professor Roseneil’s short email completely failed to engage with the detail of the issues we had raised. When we raised this with Sussex’s external and independent Chair and Vice-Chair of Council, they seemed no more prepared to address the detailed issues raised than Professor Roseneil. See our letter to Dame Denise Holt and Ms Rosemary Martin of 6 April here and Ms Martin’s short email response of 28 April here.
This sort of complacency and refusal seriously to engage with free speech compliance issues when raised is worryingly typical. We’ll be taking the matter up with the Office for Students and the new universities free speech regulator as soon as possible.
Update: Sussex have replied to our letter detailing free speech failures
(17.04.23) After two months, AFFS has received a perfunctory reply to its letter detailing free speech failures at Sussex University (including its extraordinary decision to put its Head of EDI in charge of free speech): see Sussex’s reply here. In light of this very unsatisfactory response, we have written to the independent Chair and Vice-Chair of its governing body bringing the contents of AFFS’ correspondence with the Vice-Chancellor to their attention. Read our further letter here. You’d think the University responsible for the Kathleen Stock debacle would have learned to take its free speech obligations more seriously. But you’d be wrong.
Free speech compliance issues at Sussex
(14.02.23) AFFS have been contacted by someone at Sussex University who is concerned both about a recent decision to put the Head of its EDI Unit in charge of freedom of speech and about specific aspects of its new Freedom of Speech Code.
It is symptomatic of the atmosphere at our universities that the person who raised the issues with us wishes to remain anonymous. AFFS is increasingly worried by the need for self-censorship on the part of those concerned about our universities’ failure to nurture and protect free speech culture on campuses.
AFFS is troubled by the matters raised with this, not least because of what happened to the former Sussex Professor, Kathleen Stock. Sussex is not the only institution where the management’s response to renewed pressure to comply with existing and future free speech obligations has been to seek to treat them as a subordinate aspect of their EDI campaigns.
We have written to Sussex’s new Vice-Chancellor, Professor Sasha Roseneil, asking her to appoint someone independent of its EDI unit to safeguard free speech rights and to revise its Freedom of Speech Code so that it accurately reflects the law.
See our letter to the Vice-Chancellor of Sussex here.
We’ll let you know what reply we receive. In the meantime:
What you can do:
- Share this news with your fellow Sussex graduates and suggest they join AFFS – https://affs.uk/join: it is quick and free, and the more members we have, the more pressure we can apply to our universities.
- We urge Sussex alumni to write to the Vice-Chancellor (copying in the other officers identified below).
- Please remember: express yourself moderately, and keep to the facts. Alumni care hugely about free speech, but we are not extremists.
Their emails (from public sources):
Professor Sasha Roseneil, Vice-Chancellor (S.Roseneil@sussex.ac.uk)
Professor David Ruebain, Pro-Vice Chancellor for Culture, Equality and Inclusion (D.Ruebain@sussex.ac.uk)
Geraldine Ismail, Interim Head of Legal Services (G.Ishmail@sussex.ac.uk)
Nicola Enston, Senior Legal Counsel (N.Enston@sussex.ac.uk)
Professor Kelly Coate, Pro Vice-Chancellor for Education and Students (K.Coate@sussex.ac.uk)
