Punishment of pro-Palestine student protesters sparks debate

The wave of pro-Palestine student protests and subsequent disciplinary actions have dragged Australian universities into the heart of a political row, as the Greens party accused institutions like the University of Melbourne of “cracking down on dissent” and suppressing student voices.

With recent expulsions, suspensions, and new protest policies making headlines, university campuses – long seen as spaces for free expression – are now facing renewed scrutiny amid a wider debate over the boundaries of protest, safety, and academic freedom.

At the heart of the controversy are four University of Melbourne students – two expelled and two suspended for participating in a pro-Palestine sit-in protest in October 2024.

Their disciplinary punishments – against which they have 20 days to lodge an appeal – have ignited a national conversation about the limits of campus protest and the legacy of student activism in Australia.

A sit-in, organised by the student group UniMelb for Palestine, took place in the office of Professor Steven Prawer, a prominent Jewish academic with links to Israeli institutions.

Citing harassment and property damage, the university expelled two students and suspended two others in early June 2025. The disciplinary actions were confirmed in news reports published around 3 June 2025.

The sit-in was part of broader protest action during which protesters accused the university of complicity in the Gaza conflict, calling for divestment from arms manufacturers and an end to academic ties with Israeli universities. They renamed the Arts West Building, the site of a larger occupation, “Mahmoud’s Hall”.

Vice-Chancellor Professor Emma Johnston defended the university’s actions. She told University World News: “The university respects the rights of individuals to protest – this has not changed.

Universities are places where free and open debate must take place, but the safety of our students and staff must also be protected, as this is integral to enabling free and open debate.”

A university spokesperson told University World News that some students had reported feeling “safer accessing our buildings” following a rule introduced in March 2025 banning indoor protests.

That regulation – part of the vice-chancellor’s broader powers – prohibits indoor demonstrations, any protest that obstructs entrances or exits, and disruptions to university operations.

The university also clarified that more than 16,800 students had their classes disrupted during the 2024 Arts West occupation, which contributed to the new policy.

Still, critics see the policy – and the disciplinary actions – as part of a broader crackdown on student activism.

Political ally

The Australian Greens party Deputy Leader Mehreen Faruqi has become one of the most vocal political allies of the disciplined students. “This is not about disruption – it’s about suppression,” Faruqi said at a press conference earlier this week.

“We’re seeing a systematic campaign to silence students who are speaking out against injustice.”

That sentiment is echoed across student unions, legal scholars, and civil rights organisations. Amnesty International Australia has raised concerns that the university’s actions may infringe upon fundamental human rights, including freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.

Dana Alshaer, a prominent organiser with UniMelb for Palestine, has publicly expressed concerns about the University of Melbourne’s disciplinary actions against pro-Palestinian student protesters.

She was quoted by Anadolu Agency, saying she believed the misconduct allegations were a punishment for students who defied the university’s ties with weapons manufacturers rather than the sit-in itself.

The University of Melbourne has declined to comment on individual cases, citing confidentiality, but sources confirm that the disciplinary process has concluded and affected students have the right to appeal.

Implications for free speech

Students and academics have also raised concerns about the methods used to identify protesters. Reports indicate that the university relied on internal security, surveillance footage, and Wi-Fi data to track students’ locations during the protests, practices civil liberties groups warn could have chilling implications for free speech.

The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) has recently and publicly condemned the University of Melbourne's disciplinary actions against students involved in pro-Palestinian protests.

In a media release dated 3 June 2025, the NTEU University of Melbourne branch expressed strong opposition to the expulsions and suspensions, stating: “The decision to suspend and expel students represents an unacceptable intensification of authoritarianism on campus.”

The NTEU also criticised the university’s increased surveillance measures, including electronic and Wi-Fi monitoring, and the banning of indoor and “disruptive” protests. They argue that these actions suppress academic and political freedom.

The reaction to the protest indicates a fundamental shift in how Australian universities relate to political activism.

Professor Joo-Cheong Tham from the Melbourne Law School noted in an op-ed on this matter that in the 1960s and 1970s, Australian university campuses were hotbeds of protest against the Vietnam War, apartheid, and censorship.

He wrote in The Conversation: “In more recent years, students have protested on key social, political and environmental issues, from university fees to the invasion of Iraq and climate action. This protest history feeds into the broader purposes of universities.

Universities act as a modern-day ‘public square’. This means they are a place where ideas can be freely debated and difficult issues can be explored. In this way, they act as a key component of a free and healthy democracy.”

A worrying precedent

Some see the formalisation of new restrictions – no indoor protests, designated protest zones, and mandatory approval for political signage – as disproportionately targeting the pro-Palestine cause while setting a worrying precedent for all future activism.

Besides the University of Melbourne, for instance, at the University of Sydney, a new Campus Access Policy was introduced in July 2024, requiring students and staff to give 72 hours' notice for demonstrations and approval for the use of megaphones or putting up posters.

A survey by the NTEU found that nearly 40% of university staff now feel pressured to avoid political content in their teaching, a figure that has doubled since 2022.

The controversy has spilt into federal politics.

The Greens have tabled a motion calling for an independent inquiry into free speech and disciplinary procedures at Australian universities. They argue that higher education must remain a space for “dissent, not punishment”.

The ruling Labor Party has remained largely silent, while the Coalition has taken a hardline stance.

“Universities must be places of higher learning, not indoctrination,” said Coalition’s Shadow Education Minister Sarah Henderson.