On Friday the 4th of September, Vice Chancellor Deborah Prentice, on behalf of the University, announced details of the investigation following the tragic passing of Professor Jason Arday. This is set to consist of two parts - part one, to be led by Nazir Afzal OBE (Chancellor of the University of Manchester), will examine the University’s support of Professor Arday, while part two will comprise a broader review of institutional processes and practice related to his appointment and time at Cambridge. In essence, the University has swiftly and quietly set up the “independent” review themselves.
To be clear, this announcement came as a surprise to us. We wish to emphasise, and severely condemn, the fact that this decision has been made without any substantial student involvement. In her announcement of the two-part investigation, the Vice Chancellor attempted to claim that she has, "spent the last few weeks meeting with some of the members of the community most affected by his death”. Yet, after weeks of conversations with our student body, we can say with confidence that this attempt to allude to inclusion is disingenuous given students have not been consulted in building an investigation, especially when the university administration are. We want to make this clear: neither Deborah Prentice, nor any other senior member of University staff, has done enough to meet, respond to, or support those closest to Professor Arday in the context of launching a review.
The University’s response to the allegations against, and the tragic death of, Professor Jason Arday have hugely failed both students and staff. Therefore going forward the university should allow our student body a right to contribute our experiences to an honest independent review. It is imperative that students are afforded space to provide their perspectives; an investigation into the University’s role in what happened to Professor Arday cannot be considered complete if those most affected are sidelined in the process. We therefore insist that the University hierarchy start taking students and student voices seriously and demand that in this investigation there are multiple points for students to be heard: specifically, those closest to Professor Arday and those with lived experience of systemic inequalities.
The terms laid out for the review are also notably narrow, responding to what they have attempted to delineate as two neatly contained issues. But this is inadequate: the treatment and experiences of Professor Arday are the product of far more wide reaching structures of institutional racism. He can not be singled out as an outlier or anomaly, but rather must be understood as a victim of this University’s regular functioning. In this vein, the review not only should, but must, seek to examine the diffuse racialised relationships that prop up this institution, understanding them as the backbone of this tragedy.
Members of our Sabbatical Officer team are meeting with the Vice Chancellor on Friday. We ask that the university, in this meeting, demonstrate they are seriously engaging with our outlined concerns.
- Cambridge SU Sabbatical Officer Team & your elected University Councillor.