Pro-Palestinian sit-in at JDUC brings divestment demands straight to AMS’ offices.
Following a Sept. 26th demonstration organized by Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR), members of SPHR and Queen’s University Apartheid Divest (QUAD) staged a nine-hour sit-in at the JDUC. During the sit-in, participants hung banners and temporarily renamed the atrium the “Dr. Refaat Al-Alreer Memorial Atrium” in honour of a Palestinian academic killed in Gaza, while engaging AMS executives in discussions about the University’s and the AMS’s investment practices.
READ MORE: Pro-Palestinian activists stage campus walkout and host JDUC’s first student protest
In a statement to The Journal, SPHR wrote they sought to speak with the AMS executive to discuss their concerns around divestment at Queen’s, referring to the University’s reported $222 million investment, according to a QUAD report, in companies that they deem as complicit in “the expansion of illegal settlements, apartheid, and genocide in Palestine.”
They also raised specific concerns with the AMS. “AMS currently doesn’t endorse the QUAD demands for Queen’s to divest from genocide,” the statement said. SPHR added that the AMS investment portfolio “isn’t public,” and one of their demands was for the AMS “to endorse QUAD, disclose their investments and divest if any investments that come up in disclosure, which are antithetical to AMS principles and equity policy.”
AMS President Jana Amer and Vice-President (University Affairs) Alyssa Perisa confirmed in an interview with The Journal that SPHR members entered the AMS office lobby during the sit-in, describing the encounter as a 45-minute discussion.
“They [the protestors] just wanted to talk to us about some of their demands around divestment, and just kind of exploring that and letting us know about their report,” Amer said. “One thing that we ended up also talking about is governance structures [like AMS Assembly], and how our members can use those governance structures to advance opinions and ideas.”
After several hours, SPHR stated that two Campus Security and Emergency Services (CSES) guards arrived at the sit-in after being called by a plant services worker, although the University didn’t confirm who called Campus Security. SPHR said security told them to remove banners displaying messages such as “LandBack,” “Dr. Refaat Al-Areer Memorial Atrium,” and “Queen’s U out of Occupied Palestine,” which security told SPHR violated the Student Code of Conduct.
In a statement to The Journal, the University wrote that CSES monitors large gatherings on campus to ensure compliance with University policies.
“Two CSES staff members checked in to ensure the event followed the University’s Guidelines on Peaceful Protest at Queen’s. CSES identified some banners that didn’t adhere to those guidelines. CSES personnel had a brief conversation with a faculty representative/organizer to explain the issue and referred them to the relevant policies. The organizers subsequently removed the banners,” Queen’s wrote.
Protest guidelines also became a topic of discussion last year after Provost Matthew Evans had glitter thrown on him during a Senate meeting, causing the University to reaffirm protest conduct.
Amer explained that the AMS was asked by security if they wanted the banner removed but told them not to unless it was causing damage to the building.
In their statement, SPHR also requested more advocacy from the AMS on behalf of Palestine. Amer stressed that when it comes to advocacy, the AMS acts according to its position policies approved through the Assembly. She emphasized that this framework guides what issues the student government can speak on publicly.
“We’re [the AMS] not in the mood for picking one [issue] over another. At the end of the day, oppression exists, and we’re not free until we’re all free,” Amer said.
Tags
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.
Zara
Doesn’t really sound like “advocacy” if AMS is limited by bureaucratic procedures like “position policies” than can only be approved through the Assembly that happens a limited amount of times per year. I’m not sure if Amer understands what it means to say “we’re not free until we’re all free” – that means “picking” the side of anti-oppression and calling out oppressors. Being neutral, silent, hiding behind a “two sides” argument makes you just as complicit, as anyone can learn from South African Apartheid, Black Lives Matter, and so many other social movements, including Palestinian liberation. I don’t think AMS has done enough and there have been so many opportunities, whether involving divestment or supporting the Canadian student on the Conscience Boat sailing to Gaza. AMS and Amer have got to show some courage and do better if it wants to be a student government standing on any set of principles.
marketing service
I must say this article is extremely well written, insightful, and packed with valuable knowledge that shows the author’s deep expertise on the subject, and I truly appreciate the time and effort that has gone into creating such high-quality content because it is not only helpful but also inspiring for readers like me who are always looking for trustworthy resources online. Keep up the good work and write more. i am a follower.