Academics Launch Rival Inquiry into Jason Arday’s Appointment

Academics have launched a rival inquiry into the appointment of Jason Arday, accusing the University of Cambridge of watering down its own investigation. The Times has the story.

The inquiry, commissioned by the Committee for Academic Freedom (CAF), will examine whether Arday’s appointment met the expected standards of “academic excellence, merit, integrity and procedural fairness”. 

Founded in 2023 by Edward Skidelsky, a philosopher at the University of Exeter, CAF seeks to challenge what it sees as a culture of self-censorship in universities. The group opposes equality, diversity and inclusion initiatives and gender-identity policies, but describes itself as non-partisan.

It follows what the group described to the Times as “growing professional disquiet” over Cambridge’s handling of the affair and the emergence of a campus culture where academics “feel unable to voice concerns openly”. 

The University of Cambridge was approached for comment. 

The CAF panel will be chaired by Lord Singh of Solihull, a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Warwick and a Conservative life peer. 

Members include Steven Pinker, a Professor of Psychology at Harvard; Alice Sullivan, a Professor of Sociology at UCL; Robert Tombs, Emeritus Professor of French History at Cambridge; and Lord Glasman, a Professor of Politics at St Mary’s University and a Labour life peer.

Nick Wallis, an investigative journalist who played a leading role in uncovering the Post Office Horizon scandal, will lead evidence-gathering. 

Acknowledging he had been “publicly critical of [Arday] and of the institutions that championed him”, Wallis called Arday’s death at the age of 41 a tragedy and said: “Some believe Arday was the victim of a racist witch-hunt; others believe Cambridge appointed him without adequately scrutinising his record. Both could be true, or neither.” 

He added that he intended to proceed “methodically and with an open mind, to see what conclusions the full weight of the available evidence supports”.

The rival inquiry marks an escalation in the dispute surrounding Arday, who was Cambridge’s youngest black professor. He denied allegations of plagiarism and rejected challenges to his biographical claims.

Arday resigned his chair on August 5th. On the same day, Cambridge announced an investigation into “new information” regarding his credentials. 

A week later the university’s Vice-Chancellor, Deborah Prentice, described his appointment as an “aberration”, stating an independent review would be grounded in the “highest standards of academic excellence” and inform future senior appointments.

On August 14th, Arday was found dead and an inquest was opened. 

The University of Cambridge has subsequently restructured its inquiry into two parts. Part one, a three-month inquiry led by Nazir Afzal, a former chief crown prosecutor, will examine “support, interventions and protections” available to Arday before his death. 

Afzal framed the university’s task around the institutional duty of care to a vulnerable scholar who was autistic, black and under “sustained public attack”.

He said: “Any competent review of how an employer supported him has to engage with all three of those facts rather than treating them as context.”

Part two of the Cambridge inquiry will, in six months, examine the broader context of Arday’s time at Cambridge. It will review recruitment processes for senior academic staff, institutional oversight, university responses to allegations of research misconduct, and support provided to academics under public and media scrutiny, making recommendations where appropriate.

However, CAF alleges that Cambridge underwent a pivot designed to evade uncomfortable questions about academic merit. 

Worth reading in full.