As reported in The Times today, the Committee for Academic Freedom (CAF) has written to the Vice-Chancellor of SOAS, University of London, warning that by hosting a Middle East conference where Israeli academics must declare that their institutions are built on land “taken from Palestinians,” the university may be in breach of new free speech laws.
CAF led a coalition of groups — including Academics for Academic Freedom and Alumni for Free Speech — in raising serious concerns about demands made by the organisers, the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES). The Society’s newly adopted “land-acknowledgement” policy requires conference participants to recognise “the traditional owners of the land on which their institution is located, and/or, in the case of military occupation, the status of the land under international law.”
CAF’s letter argues that compelled speech has no place on campus, and that these conditions are “incompatible with SOAS’s statutory duty to secure freedom of speech” under the newly commenced Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023.
CAF is calling on SOAS to review the terms on which the BRISMES 2026 Annual Conference is to be hosted and to ensure that no condition of participation requires, directly or indirectly, the expression of any political or moral opinion.
Below is an extract from The Times report by Sanchez Manning (4 November 2025):
The event in question is the annual conference for the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (Brismes), described as “the largest and most prestigious annual UK gathering of scholars and practitioners focusing on the region”.
The campaigners’ concerns centre on a mandatory policy published by Brismes last month on “territorial and land acknowledgment”.
It requires conference participants to acknowledge the “traditional owners of the land on which the institution to which they are affiliated is located, and/or, in the case of military occupation, acknowledge the status of the land under international law”. The policy further demands academics make a public acknowledgment if their papers are underpinned by research “conducted on land that is: traditionally owned by indigenous peoples (in settler colonial contexts) or under foreign military occupation in violation of international law”. These requirements are said to apply to all authors and participants who are “working and studying at an institution located on land appropriated from Indigenous peoples by settler colonial regimes”. Such areas are said to include the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel.
They also extend to “institutions established on land appropriated by a foreign occupying power, in contravention of international law, such as in Occupied Palestinian Territory”, as well as individuals whose research is conducted on these lands.
The policy cites Tel Aviv University as one of its main examples of how “land acknowledgment in the case of settler colonies” would apply. Brismes says that when submitting a paper to its conference, academics working at this university must state that the campus is built on the site of the Palestinian village of Sheikh Muwannis.
At the same time the policy states they should acknowledge that the area was depopulated during the nakba, an Arabic word meaning “catastrophe” that refers to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Elsewhere the document uses Ariel University in Israel as an example of “land acknowledgement in the case of Occupied Territory”. Academics from this university who wish to submit papers must include a reference in their “author affiliation” that their institution “is located in an Israeli settlement in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, an area affirmed as “illegal under international law”, the policy stipulates.
Brismes explains on its website that this policy affirms its commitment to “decolonial scholarship, human rights, and international legal norms”.
It warns that if conference participants do not comply, this will result in a rejection of their submissions or withdrawal of participation. However, a joint letter from the Committee for Academic Freedom, the London Universities’ Council for Academic Freedom, Alumni for Free Speech and Academics for Academic Freedom claims that the policy contravenes free speech regulations.
The correspondence was sent this week to senior leaders at Soas, as well as Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, and Baroness Smith of Malvern, the skills minister. It argues that the conditions being placed on conference participants are “incompatible with Soas’s statutory duty to secure freedom of speech” and breaches laws under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023. The letter’s signatories reject a disclaimer by Brismes that the policy does not represent the views of the institution hosting its conference, which Soas also pointed to.
The campaigners assert that as the host institution, Soas bears direct responsibility for upholding academic freedom and free speech regulations at events held on its premises on the presumption that its staff and students will be involved in the conference. The letter subsequently claims that in allowing Brismes to impose conference rules — such as making participation conditional upon making a “politically divisive” land acknowledgment statement — Soas is breaching a clause in the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act by granting access to its premises on ideological terms. The campaigners have also suggested that Soas is breaking its own freedom of speech code of practice, which the university says it adopted to “ensure free speech within the law is promoted and secured for our students, staff and visiting speakers”.
They called on the university to undertake an immediate review of the terms on which the Brismes conference is being hosted and ensure that “no condition of participation requires, directly or indirectly, the expression of any political or moral opinion”.
It’s worth reading the full report in The Times — an important piece on compelled speech and the new free speech duties of universities.
This investigation forms part of the Committee for Academic Freedom’s ongoing monitoring of developments in UK higher education. To receive monthly updates and analysis on cases affecting academic freedom, subscribe to our newsletter here.