Edinburgh University’s Vice Chancellor has confirmed that the opinions expressed in its “Race Review” are those of the authors and not of the University, and that the Review is only advisory at this stage.  This confirmation comes despite the implication on Edinburgh University’s website that it fully endorses the Race Review.

UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) wrote to Principal and Vice-Chancellor of Edinburgh University, Professor Sir Peter Mathieson,  on 5 September 2025 about a deteriorating situation on campus, citing repeated examples of intimidation and harassment of Jewish and Israeli students and staff. The letter expressed concern that this situation would be exacerbated by the University’s uncritical endorsement of a “Race Review” carried out by groups in the University.

The Review is entitled “Decolonised Transformations – Confronting the University of Edinburgh’s History and Legacies of Enslavement and Colonialism”. It includes a strand on Palestine, focusing on the involvement of the University’s long-serving Chancellor, Arthur Balfour.

In a statement posted on the University’s website on 27 July 2025, Professor Mathieson, described the publication of the Review as “a landmark moment in this ancient institution’s willingness and determination to learn from its past, as well as its present, in order to shape its future.”

He continued: “On behalf of the institution, I extend our deepest apologies to all individuals and communities impacted by the legacies of our connections to enslavement and colonialism. … The findings of the Race Review will help to inform our evolving policies and practices as we design a University fit for the future.”

The Review is also promoted by a video and other commentary on its website.

The Review recommends that the University:

• divest from “any interests supporting Israel’s dispossession”;
• reverse its adoption of the IHRA working definition of antisemitism; and
• establish a Palestine Studies Centre to provide space and funding for “educational activities and community engagement relating to the effects of imperial legacies on Palestine and dispossession” and scholarships for “students of Palestinian heritage”.

UKLFI’s letter pointed out that these recommendations are founded on a series of inaccurate and partisan assertions. They include the incorrect claim that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) had found a “plausible violation” by Israel of the Genocide Convention in its Provisional Measures Order of 26 January 2024. On the contrary, as the then ICJ President, Judge Donoghue, has explicitly confirmed, the ICJ “didn’t decide that the claim of genocide was plausible”.

UKLFI also noted that the Review displayed embarrassing ignorance regarding the Balfour Declaration, the history of Zionism, and the establishment of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

UKLFI considered that the University’s apparent endorsement of the highly partisan and largely inaccurate content of the Race Review regarding Palestine violated charity law.

As previously reported, UKLFI’s letter also covered a considerable number of other issues of concern.

Professor Mathieson responded on 9 September, thanking UKLFI for its letter, which he said “provides a helpful summary of the issues that we know are of concern to our Jewish and Israeli communities”.

Regarding the Race Review, Professor Mathieson wrote:

“Please be assured that the opinions therein are those of the authors (as repeatedly stated in the text) and not of the University. The Review is advisory in its nature and as such the University does now have an opportunity to reflect upon its recommendations in planning our future approach.”

UKLFI has replied:

“We appreciate your confirmation that the opinions expressed in the Race Review are those of the authors and not the University. However, we are concerned that the statements by or on behalf of the University … are liable to be seen as an endorsement of its inaccurate and one-sided content regarding Israel/Palestine. Please can you clarify the position in this regard in a further public statement.

Our letter of 5 September included a number of other requests …. Please can you respond to each of these.”

A spokesperson for UKLFI commented: “Professor Mathieson’s response is a small step in the right direction, but there is still a long way to go.”

The full list of requests in UKLFI’s letter was as follows:

1. provide an update on the status of the IHRA review and the institutional antisemitism action plan referenced by Ms McClement, and commit to consulting us and other Jewish community representatives on both;
2. review critically the Race Review and its recommendations in the light of the factual and legal points made above; ensure that the University does not endorse an inaccurate or unbalanced narrative; remove any language, assumptions, content or proposed actions that may foster a hostile environment for Jews or perpetuate antisemitic narratives or result in discrimination against Jews, Israelis or Zionists;
3. investigate the deletion of the comments during the event on 3 June and take disciplinary action against those responsible;
4. initiate disciplinary investigations into students and staff who engage in hate speech, antisemitic harassment, disruption of lawful activities on campus, or otherwise breach the law and/or the University’s policies;
5. confirm what disciplinary action, if any, was taken in relation to the incidents and social media posts outlined above, and if none, provide a clear explanation;
6. review and update protest and event protocols to prevent disruption of University activities (including open days and graduation ceremonies) and prohibit political displays at such events;
7. send a clear message that incitement to violence, such as calls for “Intifada”, is unacceptable;
8. proactively monitor protests and affiliated social media accounts to ensure compliance with the law and University’s policies;
9. engage the police where conduct may amount to criminal offences, and develop a protocol for addressing hate related incidents;
10. update reporting systems so anonymous reports are properly investigated and responded to;
11. ensure that particularly radicalised individuals are referred to the Prevent programme where appropriate;
12. instruct staff to refrain from commenting on the Israel-Hamas conflict or related geopolitical issues during teaching, unless directly relevant to course objectives, and to refrain from using University resources (including email) for personal political campaigns;
13. remind teaching staff that when they address controversial issues in their teaching, they should cover a full range of views, both for academic reasons and to comply with charity law;
14. provide staff training to ensure a clear understanding of obligations under the Equality Act 2010, including guidance on conduct that may constitute harassment or discrimination;
15. deliver compulsory antisemitism awareness training to all staff and students, comparable in format and prominence to other equality and inclusion related initiatives. This should be developed and delivered in partnership with leading experts on antisemitism and cover the history of antisemitism, including medieval and modern blood libels, pogroms, the Holocaust, and beyond. It should include how contemporary antisemitism often manifests through disproportionate or obsessive hostility toward Israel, and it should address the potential harm that can be caused by higher education institutions through their conduct (including lack of action), and the impact this can have on Jewish, Israeli and Zionist students; and
16. provide a structured, neutral, and professionally facilitated session on non-violent communication (NVC), open to all students and staff affected by the Israel-Hamas conflict. This should be facilitated by trained NVC practitioners unaffiliated with either side of the political debate. It should be designed to create a safe space for expressing the emotional and psychological impact of the conflict, without demonising or marginalising individuals or communities.