THE rector of a Scottish university has said the institution has “betrayed” her and “the entire student body” by removing her from key roles after she called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
Stella Maris – who was dismissed from St Andrews University’s governing body and stripped of her role as a trustee – told The National the institution had set a “dangerous precedent” for freedom of speech in higher education.
An investigation was launched by Morag Ross KC following an email Maris sent to all students in November calling for an immediate ceasefire.
It concluded on Thursday that it would be “disproportionate” to dismiss Maris, but the university court – St Andrews’ governing body – said it had acted because Maris repeatedly declined to accept Ross’s conclusions which suggested she had made some students “fear for their safety”.
The university has denied it stripped Maris of the roles because of the views she expressed on Israel and Palestine, but Maris still believes she was removed from the court because she called for an end “to Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians”.
In an exclusive interview with The National, Maris – who became rector last year after previously being a student – was asked if she felt betrayed by the Fife university.
She said: “By undermining the role of the rector as an independent voice for students, the university has not only betrayed me but the entire student body.
“The decision sends a concerning message to all students who voice their support for an immediate ceasefire, and it sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of speech in higher education.”
In her message to students, Maris described Israel’s attacks on Gaza as “genocidal” and condemned practices including “apartheid, siege, illegal occupation and collective punishment”.
She also denounced “war crimes” by Hamas, “notably the taking of hostages and deliberately targeting civilians”.
Asked why she put this message out, Maris said there had been “significant” concern on campus about violence in Palestine and Israel.
She said: “As rector, my role is to advocate for students and to articulate their concerns.
“At the time of my statement, there was significant concern on campus over the escalation of extreme violence in Palestine and Israel and an overwhelming majority of students were in favour of an immediate ceasefire.
“As a democratically elected independent voice for students, I had a duty to condemn all violence, denounce the loss of Palestinian lives and advocate for the respect of human rights. “
Maris said she did not feel “adequately supported” by the university at any stage of the investigation and claims she was not given an opportunity to present her case or have someone represent her in discussions that ultimately led to her being dismissed from the court.
Ray Perman, the senior lay member and chair of the university court, said they had “unfortunately now reached the point where university court has concluded that she is in serious and persistent breach of her responsibilities and can no longer sit as president”.
He said the court stressed “this decision has no bearing on Maris’s freedom of speech, to which she is entitled”.
Maris has said she will be appealing the decision as she believes the internal investigation’s report “falls short” of calling for the removal of her trustee status and her dismissal from the court.
“I believe I have been removed from University Court because I called for an end to Israel’s war crimes against Palestinians, which is why I will be appealing this decision,” she said.
“The report of the internal investigation commissioned by the university explicitly falls short of calling for the removal of my trustee status and says that dismissing me from Court would be disproportionate to my actions.
“Only the court will be able to explain why they’ve chosen to go further than the recommendations in the report, as I was not part of the discussions which led to this decision.”
Maris – who will stay on as rector until October 2026 when her term expires – added she would like to thank all those who had sent messages of support, saying that it was “encouraging to see that so many people are committed to protecting freedom of speech in higher education”.
A spokesperson for St Andrews University said:
"The Rector’s claims are based on the notion that she was discharged because she spoke out against Israeli aggression, and that is not the case.
"The University Court has made very clear that the Rector is entitled to freedom of speech.
"She was discharged because she repeatedly declined to accept the findings of an independent external investigation which established that she had breached her legal responsibilities as a Court member and charity trustee, failed to act with courtesy and respect, and by her actions and activities made some students, who it was her duty to represent, fear for their safety.
"'As a young neurodiverse black woman with limited financial resources, I did not feel adequately supported by the university at any stage of this process. I was not even given the opportunity to present my case or to have someone represent me in the discussions that lead to the decision to remove me from University Court '"
"Ms Maris has received the following support from the University:
- Significant time, support and advice from several senior members of staff while she was drafting and consulting on her original statement in October and November 2023 – this is detailed and referred to in the Ross report.
- Senior members of staff continuing to check in with her on a personal basis after the original statement was issued, out of concern for her welfare, when she was under significant media pressure.
- Facilitated mediation sessions with the Principal
- While a Court member, she had the ongoing admin and clerical support of Court Office (available to all members of Court) including, but not limited to, the regular couriering of documents to her residence.
- After the original statement was issued in November 2023, the University appointed a former senior member of staff with experience in counselling and support to provide ongoing personal support to Ms Maris. She has availed herself of that service on an almost daily basis. That support is continuing, notwithstanding her discharge from Court.
"Ms Maris was given, and took, the opportunity to present her case in person to Court on two separate occasions, as well as tabling documents setting out her arguments in detail.
"Her further written exchanges with the Senior Lay Member were also shared with Court to inform its discussions.She was also advised she could continue to make her case in person, or in writing.
"Two dialogue sessions were arranged with the Convener of Court’s Governance and Nominations Committee, to obtain a better understanding of Ms Maris’ position, and detailed reports of these were provided to Court.
"A third was offered but declined by Ms Maris. Ms Maris was also offered, and declined, the opportunity of a facilitated discussion with an external mediator, as well as meetings with her legal representatives.Before every meeting, both formal and informal, Ms Maris was advised that she could be accompanied by a supporter in meetings over the three months in which Court attempted to seek a resolution with her.
"Her statement, as presented here, is both misleading and untrue."
