Cambridge University ‘attempting to silence students and academics’, Liberty says in protest legal challenge

• Liberty has intervened in a legal challenge against a ban on protest at Cambridge University.
• The High Court injunction raises questions about free speech on campus.
• Liberty has called the injunction “a threat to freedom of expression on campus.”

Human rights organisation Liberty has accused Cambridge University of “attempting to silence students and academics” in a legal intervention against plans from the university to apply a ‘persons unknown’ civil injunction against protesters. Liberty has called the proposed ban a “threat to freedom of expression on campus.”

In a hearing today (Wednesday 19 March) at the High Court, Cambridge University is seeking an injunction against any protests related to Palestine and Israel until the end of July 2025, which Liberty says would effectively amount to a blanket ban on protest. Cambridge University have applied to the Court to ban pro-Palestine protests on university land until the end of July 2025. Liberty has intervened in the legal case to challenge this injunction, arguing that the injunction is too broad and effectively criminalises protest on campus.

At a hearing on 27 February 2025, the Court refused to grant the original injunction sought by the University. It instead granted a two-day injunction to cover a graduation ceremony on 1 March and adjourned the final hearing until mid-March. As the injunction is against ‘persons unknown’, there were no named defendants at the hearing to defend the injunction, but following an intervention from the European Legal Support Center (ELSC) supported by Liberty and the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to protest, Cambridge University have already decreased the injunction sought from five years to five months. The hearing today (Wednesday 19 March) will set a legal precedent about the right to protest on campus.

Lawyers for Liberty will argue:

• The ‘persons unknown’ injunction is far too broad and prohibits a wide range of activity on campus
• The injunction creates a chilling effect on free speech on campus, and effectively criminalises staff and students who inadvertently breach it
• Injunctions lack safeguards to protect individuals who may be accidentally caught by overly broad protest bans

The European Legal Support Center (ELSC), who intervened in the earlier High Court hearing, will be arguing that the injunction amounts to discrimination against Palestinian staff and students, and is a breach of the right to freedom of expression.

This case comes after a joint investigation between Liberty Investigates and Sky News found Universities are actively working with private security and the police to stop protests on campus, targeting students with disciplinary action, and cracking down on free speech on campus.

With more universities seeking ‘persons unknown’ injunctions banning protests, this case will set a precedent which could be replicated across the country.

Akiko Hart, Liberty’s Director said:
“In recent years, new laws have made it increasingly difficult for people to exercise their right to protest, and it’s alarming that this crackdown is playing out on university campuses too. As these injunctions and recent findings from Liberty Investigates show, universities are infringing on students’ rights by creating a hostile space for people simply trying to make their voices heard on an issue that matters to them.

“Students have long been at the forefront of movements for social change. Liberty is defending their right to protest.”

Katy Watts, Lawyer at Liberty said:
“The precedent set at this hearing will determine how students can act on campus in future, and the right to protest for us all.

“Universities cannot just choose to limit free expression when it suits them. ‘Persons unknown’ injunctions are broad tools that can have huge consequences for the individuals they sweep up, and can effectively criminalise students and staff for standing up for what they believe in.

“We hope that the court will refuse to make this injunction which is an attempt to silence students and academics, and a threat to freedom of expression on campus.”