University of Manchester Students’ Union Executive has written an open letter to University of Nottingham Students’ Union Executive asking them why they haven’t defended political freedoms on their campus.

An Open Letter to Nottingham Students’ Union Executive

When activists at the University of Nottingham decided to inject some politics onto their campus and protest against the Israeli Apertheid Wall, campus security called the Police who arrested one activist. The response of the University and the Police was appaling. However, even worse, the Students’ Union did nothing to defend its membership. Below is a copy of the letter sent by UMSU to Nottingham in protest.

Dear Executive Members, Nottingham Students’ Union

We are writing to express our concerns regarding an incident involving Students at Nothingham University on the 04/12/07.

Given the sacrosanct nature of freedom of assembly in facilitating the right of students to be politically active on any campus across the country, and the implied responsibility student unions have in supporting students ability to engage freely and without hinderence in pursuit of their causes, it is vital that we, as representatives of student bodies, ensure that any infringements are condemned and these basic rights asserted.

It is in the spirit of defending the rights of Students to engage in political activity that we, the executive of Manchester Students Union write to you.

It is our belief that if students are attacked in one part of the country, as a student movement we have an obligation to stand in solidarity with those attacked. In this case it appears that Nothingham Students have had their basic democratic rights attacked, and any future student actions undermined.

Students from Nothingham University excerised their right to protest against the Apartheid Israeli Wall currently being constructed in the Occupied territories. Those students used their right to engage in political activity to legitimately raise awareness of this situation and illustrated how the wall is creating an obstacle to the development of a lasting peace.

The fact that University Security Guards were deployed by the authorities with the expressed objective to illegitimately shut down this student action stands as an affront to all basic principles of student autonomy.

If this was not bad enough, the involvement of the police on a student campus threatening the arrest of students in their own university raising awareness on an issue would be more akin to the response of Mugabe’s Zimbawe or the military in Burma.

We ask that you take this issue seriously, and affirm the freedom of students to engage in political activity on campus. In addition, we would hope that the Students’ Union take the issue up with the University authority and point out that across the country students have engaged in similar actions without the violent response of the authorities.

If we can be of any assistance in helping you to assert these basic student rights then please get in touch and we will offer all the solidarity and support necessary to challenge these unacceptable infringements.

In solidarity,

University of Manchester Students’ Union Executive.

(This document was produced but the University of Manchester Students’ Union Campaigns to counter all the false rumours that were being spread on campus to stop the twining motion, home fees for asylum seekers motion and boycotted Coca-Cola motions. Also to counter the very biased approach most of the media covered the meeting)

The Union General Meeting on Wednesday was the biggest for a long time with over 600 students attending. You may have heard a lot of rumours, but here is what was decided and why.

Why twin with a Palestinian university?
The Israeli Occupation of Palestine has consistently denied students their fundamental Right to Education. The Right to Education is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of human rights and it is these rights, that are inalienable for all people wherever they are in the world, that we think, as a Union, should be respected. The motion to twin with Al-Najah University was a symbolic gesture to our Palestinian brothers and sisters to remind them that that they are not alone in their struggle to live like human beings. Many Palestinians feel isolated and let down by the world, this twinning motion shows that we recognise their struggle and offer our support to their cause.

Is the University of Al Najah a supporter of terrorism?
There have been suicide bombers who have come from Al Najah. This does not mean that the university supports the actions of these people. The 14000 students of Al Najah should not be held collectively responsible for the actions of a few. It is not this institution that is responsible for the creation of suicide bombers, but the oppressive actions of Israel, through occupation and oppression they endanger their own citizens.

Why do we oppose international fees for asylum seekers?
Asylum seekers are the most vulnerable people in this society, often slipping into the “destitution trap”. They are refused the right to work in this country and given £35 a week in food vouchers to support themselves. We believe that charging fees of over£8000 amounts to the removal of their right to education, which is enshrined in international law.

Why have we boycotted Coca-Cola?
Coke’s human rights abuses and environmental disregard is well documented. War on Want found that the Coke bottling plants in India were draining vast quantities of ground water to produce their soft drinks. This leads to water shortages in an already regularly drought riden country. Wells dry up, farmers can’t irigate crops, so crops fail and poverty is perpetuated. The bottling plants also spew out untreated toxic waste, which poisons any water that remains. Generous as they are Coca-Cola offered the farmers effected a compensation package in the form of fertilizer, fertilizer that contained dangerous levels of the toxic chemicals, cadmium and lead. In colombia at least 9 workers at Coke bottling plant have been murdered since 1994 and hundreds have been kidnapped or intimidated by paramillitaries for trying to trade unionise. New York councellor Monserat found that these abuses went on, if not with the complicity, at least with the knowledge of the directors of Coca Cola. Will this effect union revenues? It shouldn’t effect the money the union takes on soft drinks. sussex, who recently boycotted Coke, found that the takings on drinks did not fall at all. The alternative that they provide is actually cheaper for the union to purchase than coke, so profits have gone up. A sound bussiness decision as well as an ethical one.

Shouldn’t students make up their own minds?
As a democrtatic, membership organisation we have the right to decide what to sell in our union. The union isn’t just another place to get cheap drinks or see a gig, it’s an organisation that has principals and values. Coke doesn’t live up to the standards that we expect from a company and so we will not sell their products in our union. We beleive that as a Union we should not make money from, or give money to a company that is responsible for scuh human rights abuses, environemntal destruction, Union busting, displacement and murder. Until this changes there will be no Coke sold in the Union.

Will it have any effect?
With other Unions across the UK joining this boycott we are already costing Coke a lot of money and prestige. If this motion gets passed at NUS it will mean that Coke will lose their single largest contract in the UK. Because the Union workers in India and colombia have called for this action we beleive that such an enourmous cut in profits and the damage to the reputatation that this would cause would force Coca Cola to reconsider their management and support of human Rights violations.

What about the bullying motion?
Bullying is an everyday reality for people in all walks of life. This motion clarifys the unions opposition to all forms of bullying and highlights the fact that bullying goes on around campus.