Angela Metcalf

🚨 University accused of muzzling academic over his views on assisted dying. Dr Kevin Yuill, emeritus professor of history at the University of Sunderland, has accused the institution of a “Kafkaesque” attack on free speech after he was sent a warning letter by one of its executives. Dr Yuill was ominously told to “reflect carefully” in June after the university received a complaint about the “tone and nature” of his social media presence, which he has used to campaign against assisted suicide. Yuill has described the letter as a “veiled threat” that risks chilling academic freedom, telling The Telegraph: “It’s an outrageous thing for them to do.” Concerningly — but as is too often the case — Yuill was not initially told what the complaint was about. In emails seen by The Telegraph, he was instead asked to “reflect carefully” on his emeritus title because it “carries an expectation that its use does not adversely affect the institution or conflict with its core values, including respect and responsible public discourse”. The university also claimed he was causing “reputational damage” to Sunderland by “weaponising his public platform” and that his advocacy against assisted suicide meant he lacked the “objectivity expected of a university academic”. At the Free Speech Union, we all too frequently see institutions and employers accuse their employees or associates of bringing them “into disrepute” simply because they disagree with their legitimate and lawful views. Lawyers representing Dr Yuill argue that his beliefs are protected under the university’s code of practice on freedom of speech and academic freedom, the Equality Act 2010 and the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023. Dr Yuill said: “I’m hoping it will make them think twice before reacting to complaints of a similar nature, so my hope is it will be a bit of a lesson for them, which is why I’ve gone full on with this whole thing. “Not because it’s a threat to me, but for younger colleagues who are in paid positions, I don’t think it’s in anybody’s interest to have Sunderland censoring their ideas or even pushing them to self-censor their ideas.” The debate over assisted dying has been one of the most prominent political and moral debates of recent years, with strongly held views on both sides. The Bill returns to Parliament next month and will once again attract considerable attention. It is deeply concerning that an academic institution would issue thinly veiled threats to an associate because he holds a particular view on a major moral, ethical and societal question. Freddie Attenborough of the Committee for Academic Freedom has also called the case concerning, saying: “Academic freedom means little if academics have to worry that expressing controversial views within the law might put their institutional status or privileges at risk.” He added: “Universities should be protecting the space for those disagreements, not adding institutional pressure to one side of them.” Dr Yuill, who is chief executive of Humanists Against Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, was not initially allowed to see the complaint on the grounds that it was “submitted by a private individual and contains that individual’s personal and sensitive information”. Universities should be bastions of free and open debate — not institutions that pressure academics to self-censor because someone has complained about their lawful views. Read more below 👇