The Times- Stonewall 'gave bad advice to university in free speech row

Stonewall has been accused of misrepresenting the law in its advice to Essex University, which failed to uphold free speech when it dropped speakers accused of transphobia.

A barrister, Akua Reindorf, warned of “potential illegalities” and said the university should reconsider its ties to the campaigning group. Her report was commissioned by Essex after two professors were disinvited from events.

Stonewall provides expert advice to hundreds of organisations, including employers, schools, universities and police forces, through its “diversity champions” programme.

Jo Phoenix, a professor in criminology at the Open University, was due to speak at a Centre for Criminology seminar on trans rights, imprisonment and the criminal justice system in 2019. After protests about her inclusion, the event was cancelled. Rosa Freedman, a professor of law development and global conflict at Reading University, was told she would be invited to speak at an event on antisemitism. She was dropped but reinstated after she complained. The women were accused of being “transphobes” or having engaged in hate speech that would cause harassment to students.

The report by Reindorf, a barrister specialising in employment and discrimination, has been accepted by the university, which promised to act on its recommendations.

It says that the wording of the university’s policy on supporting trans and non-binary staff could have been used to lend credence to the idea that newspaper letters on trans issues, written by the two women, could amount to or lead to unlawful harassment.

She said: “This policy is founded on an erroneous understanding of the law. The policy is reviewed annually by Stonewall and its incorrect summary of the law does not appear to have been picked up by them.

“In my view the policy states the law as Stonewall would prefer it to be, rather than the law as it is. To that extent the policy is misleading.”

The policy said it was unlawful under the Equality Act 2010 to discriminate against someone because of their gender identity or trans status. But Reindorf’s report said this did not accurately state the law, since “gender identity or trans status” are not protected characteristics; rather, the protected characteristic is gender reassignment.

It added: “Moreover, it cannot be said that the examples given would invariably amount to unlawful discrimination or, in some cases more accurately, harassment.”

Reindorf recommended that the university give careful consideration to its relationship with Stonewall. She said: “In particular, it should consider that this relationship appears to have given university members the impression that gender critical academics can legitimately be excluded from the institution.”

Liz Ward of Stonewall said: “Our advice on the Equality Act is based on guidance provided by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which was recently reaffirmed in the High Court.”