A serious controversy is unfolding over the decision to host Tommy Robinson at the Oxford Union for a debate on “Suspicions Towards Islam” on May 28, with questions being raised over why a far-right Islamophobe is being platformed by such an institution.
The Oxford Union, the world’s most prestigious debating society, and its Muslim Palestinian-origin president, Arwa Elrayess, are coming under fire for defending their decision to host Islamophobe Tommy Robinson.
Various student-led organisations and societies at Oxford University have publicly condemned the decision, claiming that it will cause irreversible damage to the university’s reputation whilst putting Muslim and minority students at risk of harm.
Tommy Robinson will take part in a debate on May 28 under the motion: “This House believes the West is Right to be Suspicious of Islam.”
Robinson will debate alongside other prominent Islamophobes such as Laurence Fox and Calvin Robinson. They will be opposed by right-wing Tory politician Jacob Rees-Mogg, with no current confirmation of Muslim speakers in the opposition motion.
Defending the decision
Elrayess, who recently made international headlines after becoming the first Muslim president of Palestinian origin at the Union, defended her decision to platform Robinson in an article in The Telegraph, stating that it is a matter of free speech, which the Union claims to uphold.
Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest news and updates from around the Muslim world!
In a separate interview on GB News, Elrayess gave further reasoning behind her decision: “Muslims are constantly being scapegoated for issues that arise… So I wanted to have a debate on the motion as to whether any suspicions of Islam are justified.”
“When we were thinking of this debate and this motion, we wanted to look for the figures who are the figureheads of these views.
“We couldn’t think of anyone who is more loud and unashamed of those views than Tommy Robinson.”
When asked about Robinson’s criminal past, and whether it would harm the status of the Union, Elrayess said that Robinson had already been invited in the past for a talk at the union, but this current invitation is a debate on a specific motion with an opposition to dismantle his views.
“I wouldn’t say it is a platform, it’s very much a test of scrutiny,” Elrayess said.
Disapproval within Oxford
But the controversy within Oxford has intensified, as the Chief Advisor of the Union and to Elrayess, Shermar Pryce, resigned over the issue, calling the decision a “clown show” made by people who are “intellectually dishonest and morally corrupt.”
“Facilitating his appearance, practically in secret, without even mentioning it in the Term Card, demonstrates a complete lack of conviction and a cowardly refusal to face the membership you claim to represent. Many members of the committee had no idea that Tommy Robinson would be coming until they saw the OxStu article,” Pryce said in her resignation letter.
“No sensible justification for this decision-making has been provided. The decision to invite a violent criminal to the Union, appealing to malformed conceptions of ‘free speech’, was callous. To not rethink this invite, after members of all backgrounds and dispositions have expressed their concerns and fears, borders on malicious,” the letter concluded.
Sarah Rana, the first hijabi officer of the Oxford Union, also expressed her disapproval over the decision, saying in a statement: “The fact that you had to hide this Tommy Robinson invite and there’s leaked proof that you did it so you could fill the chamber and appear not too ‘Muslim’ is so clear; and you hid it from your entire committee and the public. This is not about student politics, it’s literally a question of safety!”
Other senior students in positions of leadership, such as the Union’s Vice President Prajwal Pandey, described the Robinson invitation in a speech to members as a “genuine risk to the safety of members.”
He also criticised what was described as the leadership’s recent “far-right pandering media grift” on GB News and in The Telegraph, arguing that the Union should exist for “intellectual and educational purpose, not spectacle, provocation, or entertainment value.”
It has also been revealed to 5Pillars by sources within the university that several prominent speakers have withdrawn from future Union events and debates, such as Francesca Albanese.
Pro-Palestine censorship concerns
Further criticism has been raised over the selective “censorship” of the Oxford Union.
In November 2024, Palestinian author Susan Abulhawa spoke at the Oxford Union about Israel’s genocide in Palestine. Her speech was watched online by over 250,000 people.
The Union later took it down and reuploaded an edited version, which allegedly cut nearly two minutes from her speech, breaching an agreement between Abulhawa and the university.
Abulhawa has been campaigning for 17 months for the Union to restore her full speech under ethical obligations.
The Oxford Union has cited “potential legal concerns” to justify the edit but has failed to comply with Susan’s data subject access request to see the information behind those alleged concerns.
5Pillars’ poll
5Pillars conducted a poll of its readers and viewers across social media about if they think Muslims should debate Tommy Robinson at the Oxford Union on May 28.
Out of over 800 responses, 63% said that he should be debated for the sake of defending Islam and to expose him.
Whilst 37% said he should be denied a prominent, prestigious platform and be boycotted altogether.
