POLICE acted unlawfully by attempting to bring to an end a student occupation at a leading Scottish university which resulted in mass disorder, an internal inquiry has ruled.
A report into the botched eviction, which led to unprecedented scenes of unrest at Glasgow University, found officers from Strathclyde Police had “no legal authority” to remove protesters.
The inquiry, led by Charles Kennedy, former leader of the LibDems and the university’s rector, went on to question decisions taken by senior officials at the institution.
Mr Kennedy also criticised the nature of the long-running occupation of the Hetherington House building by students.
“The inquiry believes the occupation of a university building without permission for a prolonged period coupled with an unrealistic set of demands goes beyond legitimate protest,” his report stated.
In conclusion, Mr Kennedy called for the university to introduce a number of improvements to its internal decision-making procedures to ensure there is no repetition of the highly damaging scenes.
The inquiry was launched after an attempt by university security staff to end the long-running student protest against cuts in higher education got out of hand and resulted in some 80 police officers arriving at the scene with helicopter support.
The inquiry found the university’s original strategy of allowing students to occupy the building was “sensible” and could have been successful.
However, on March 22 the possibility of an “opportunistic approach” emerged when the university’s head of security realised there were only a few protesters in the building.
He suggested closing it off, but crowds began to gather outside as the handful of students inside alerted others through social networking sites and mobile phone calls and messages.
The head of security then asked for police support to deal with crowds, but this resulted in police removing the protesters.
“Police have confirmed the police officers who attended and removed the protesters should not have done so as they had no legal authority for this action,” the inquiry report stated.
On the university’s decision to pursue a more direct approach, the report said: “The decision taken was one which ought to have been recognised as likely to give rise to significant problems.
“It should not have been left to one person, in this particular case the Secretary of Court, to make the decision to proceed with the opportunistic approach without any attempt being made to consult.”
In his foreword to the inquiry report Mr Kennedy issued a warning over the need to take account of the way social media and internet communication have “changed the rules of engagement” of protests.
“The events ... highlighted how quickly and easily peaceful protests can turn to mass disorder,” he said. “Armed with little more than a mobile phone or laptop, those seeking to disrupt can communicate instantaneously with their supporters and the mass media.”
Professor Anton Muscatelli, the university Principal, said: “We find the report fair and its recommendations appropriate.”
Superintendent Nelson Telfer, of Strathclyde Police said: “We do accept . . . that for a short period at the start of the incident, our officers did assist in the eviction of some of the students. This is something that should not have happened.”
