Otago Students for Justice in Palestine (OSJP) held another rally for Palestine on Otago University campus on April 16th*. Speeches were given by Neave, an organiser for OSJP, and Brandon Johnstone, a member of Staff for Palestine. The group proceeded to march around the Uni, chanting for their cause: a free Palestine, and a university non-complicit in genocide.
The rally was the latest in a string of similar events extending back for the better part of a year. OSJP was born last May with the following mandate: “We are an education and action group demanding our university end its complicity to the ongoing genocide of the Palestine people.” Their main efforts have focused on the University adopting a Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) policy, which would essentially mean having no financial ties to the state of Israel who the world is condemning for committing genocide. To date, the University has not made a decision – hence the continued rallies.
Following the rally, Critic Te Ārohi caught up with OSJP for a kōrero. Neave, a PPE graduate studying toward a diploma in theatre, acted as the spokesperson for the group. The rally was intended to serve as a public reminder of their goals. OSJP luckily didn’t run into any issues, unlike one occasion in October last year that saw one student threatened with arrest following the alleged breaking of a glass door within the University’s Clocktower. But this time, OSJP hadn’t been involved in such a drama. “Not a sausage, really,” Neave told Critic.
Given the varied track record, Neave said there’s been “internal debate” within OSJP over the best course of communication with the University. For instance, should they spill the beans about a protest before it happens? Or does that “give the game away” as Neave put it. “A bunch of our members think that [communication with the University] is strategically not what we want to do,” they revealed. The reasoning is that it could allow the Uni to block protests, rendering them pointless – banging on the locked door of the Clocktower while the Uni Council stuffs wool in their ears.
On the other hand, Neave told Critic that they personally didn’t mind “a bit of transparency” with the Uni. In their opinion, letting the Uni know that OSJP is “trying to keep things safe, and to procedure” could only be a good thing – perhaps preventing misunderstandings like last October. “But we’re a democratic organisation,” Neave digressed, explaining that they operate in a structure free from hierarchy.
Neave confirmed that OSJP has had formal meetings with the University Registrar and Jessica Palmer (Deputy Vice-Chancellor). But they didn’t lead to anything concrete. “[OSJP] hadn’t seen much action [from the University] by just talking, so that's why we think that these sorts of non-violent actions are the way forward in applying pressure,” they said. The Proctor allegedly reaches out to OSJP often, and the internal debate about whether they should respond continues on. For now, poor old Proctor has been left on seen. Despite the disagreement, Neave assured Critic that OSJP is otherwise largely in consensus about strategy and planning, and that “we’re all friends.”
Despite the occasional bump in the road, OSJP is united in their determination to see their aims achieved. “We’re in it for the long haul,” Neave affirmed to Critic. “We want BDS enacted at Otago, as the situation in Gaza is only getting more and more dire. This continued policy of institutional neutrality is reprehensible, and if students stand up united, we can make positive change for human rights and peace.” In case you’re not yet familiar, institutional neutrality is the idea that universities should not, as institutions, take positions on social and political issues.
A University of Otago spokesperson told Critic Te Ārohi that “the University does not have an official position on the situation in Gaza. We have a long-standing position of institutional neutrality on geo-political issues that do not directly impact on the University.” The Otago Staff for Palestine group has sent a BDS proposal to the University which is “waiting for a working group considering the issue of institutional neutrality to report back to the University before any further discussion takes place at senate." Critic did not gain a response from the Proctor regarding their relationship with OSJP, as he is on annual leave (blesh).
BDS hasn’t only been on the table for the University. A little closer to home, OUSA has held a BDS “posture” that meant their annual revenue-earning Tent City turned business away from the BDS-listed Domino’s (physically turning them away when they tried to attend anyway). The posture earned OUSA a shout-out at the OSJP rally from guest speaker Brandon Johnstone. He had perhaps missed the most recent update: Critic Te Ārohi reported in early March (Issue 3) that the BDS policy is confirmed to be up for review by OUSA by July following numerous complaints from the student body. Domino’s Dunedin franchise owner also confirmed to Critic that his business had no connection to Israel.
OSJP weren’t among the student complaints, however. Neave said they were “definitely pleased” with OUSA’s handling of BDS. However, they expressed that they’d like to “see OUSA adopt that democratically and not top down,” referring to the fact that the posture was adopted largely without student consultation. Neave was a fan of having BDS democratically and student-mandated at the upcoming referendum, acknowledging that some students may have felt the decision was a “unilateral action”.
The nature of OUSA’s BDS was also called into question. “I don’t think Domino’s was a list A or primary target,” Neave told Critic (rip). OSJP follow the official BDS movement from BDS.net, restricting their efforts to targeted boycotts of brands like SodaStream, Coke-related products and HP computers. Neave confirmed that OSJP plan on submitting two questions for the referendum (referendum questions are open until May 2nd!) regarding the BDS policy. “One is to have OUSA formally adopt the BDS policy [with a student mandate], and the other is to have OUSA lobby for [Uni] adoption of BDS.”
Critic reported in early March that the OUSA Exec wished to “pursue further student feedback” and “will seek to canvas a student consensus by encouraging robust debate on campus” over the coming months, hoping to decide BDS by July. At the time, the Exec hadn’t decided on an exact plan for how they’d “canvas student opinion”, but discussed options such as a student/Exec forum and referendum. Seems we’ve leapfrogged straight to the referendum.
When approached for comment, Prez Liam told Critic that the Exec pursued initial feedback on the BDS policy by inviting people to reach out to him through the OUSA President email and Instagram. “This generated quite a lot of response,” Liam told Critic. “I made an effort to respond to everyone who reached out. Beyond this, I've reached out to some interested student groups and discussed what this process will likely look like and how OUSA can best support them.” He explained that a “town hall style forum” would be most appropriate to deal with any BDS-related questions, where students can “discuss and question all referendum questions with the Exec.” So no special BDS forum. While he felt it wasn’t fair to comment on the referenda questions submitted by students thus far, he did mysteriously allude to receiving “multiple options for a path forward.”
However, students will still get a chance to have their say, even if there hasn’t been a specific forum set regarding OUSA’s BDS posture. According to OUSA’s referenda procedure, a student forum must be held at least a day before voting opens, “where those who have put a question, and any students who would like to discuss/debate motions, can do so."
*This article has been amended to fix a typo that was included in the print version which originally had the wrong date.