“It is not true”: Rector Stella Maris accuses the University of St Andrews of misrepresentation
In an exclusive interview with The Saint, University Rector Stella Maris speaks out after being discharged from the University Court in August 2024. Maris defends the statement she made in November 2023 accusing Israel of “genocidal attacks” in Gaza. She remains resolute in her position against the University’s decision to dismiss her as President of the University Court and as a charity trustee, accusing the University of misrepresentation, “racial stereotyping,” and not giving concerns about Islamophobia and the Pro-Palestinian movement “the attention they deserve.” Maris describes the independent investigation into her statement as “biased”.
In January 2024, the University announced an independent investigation, led by Lady Morag Ross KC, as to whether Maris’ statement breached the responsibilities and standards placed on her as a member of the Court and a charity trustee. In her statement, made within five weeks of her election, Maris called for an immediate ceasefire and accused Israel of “genocidal attacks” in Gaza, whilst denouncing “war crimes” by Hamas. Ross’ findings were released publicly on 29 July, 2024, calling some of Maris’ statements “unwise and ill-judged,” but circumstances were not “sufficiently clear [...] to show that there is a breach of the relevant obligations,” and did not advise dismissal.
Despite this, on 1 August, 2024, the University announced that the Court had unanimously discharged Maris, with one abstention. The University stated that their decision was not due to her initial statement regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict, but because Maris “repeatedly declined to accept the conclusion of an independent investigation, which found that she had made some students ‘fear for their safety,’ and by her actions and activities breached her responsibilities and legal obligations.” Speaking to The Saint, Maris asserts, “It is not true.”
“I do not regret releasing that statement at all. Not even a little bit.”
“In as far as the term ‘genocide’, I understand that some people found it to be inflammatory. I consider what's happening in Gaza to be inflammatory.”
“My view of it was, it is very important to use the right words to describe reality, even if it turned out that I was wrong. I knew what my intentions were behind saying what I said, which was not anti-semitism. It was not to inflame tensions against any group. It was to fulfil the mandate that I had had drilled into me from childhood, which was in memory of the Holocaust, never again.”
Maris joined St Andrews as an undergraduate in 2017. She became heavily involved in student representation, serving as Rector’s Assessor under former Rector Dr Leyla Hussein. The position acts as a bridge to the student body, leads the Rector’s Committee, and sits as a full-time member of the University Court, the governing body of the University of St Andrews. After graduating, Maris was elected by the student population as Rector in November 2023.
While Maris still holds the title of ‘Rector’ until her term expires in October 2026, she cannot enact its traditional responsibilities as President or a member of the University Court.
The role of University Rector has diverging definitions. The University of St Andrews website states: “The role of the Rector is to preside at meetings of the University Court.” The University of St Andrews Students Association outlines that it is “completely independent and external to the University and represents the student community in the University’s major decision-making committees.” The 2023 Rectorial Election Handbook states that the values of a Rector include a “willingness to champion a cause, without fear or favour.”
Speaking to The Saint, Vice-Principal (Governance) Alastair Merrill, who acts as Secretary to the University Court, stated that in relation to the Court the role of Rector is “not technically a student representative.” He stated: “Whilst the Rector has got important pastoral responsibilities in relation to the entire student population, the Rector’s primary role in relation to Court is to act as its President and not to champion any particular voice.” He continued, “It’s increasingly a ceremonial role in relation to Court, but it can bring perspectives. The Rector has got a very important pastoral role.”
“I felt that at the time that accusation was more to do with silencing voices like mine.”
Maris’ November 2023 statement received a mixed reaction from the student community. One open letter issued by “alumni, students, and friends of the University of St Andrews” declared it was “unacceptable for the Rector to be selective in their responsibility to represent all students”. In a post on Instagram, St Andrews’ Jewish Society called Maris’ statement “divisive, harmful and not based on fact,” and did not address the “multiple anti-semitic attacks in St Andrews.” The society took issue with her use of the ‘Electronic Intifada’ as a source, which they claimed has “consistently given voice to antisemitic journalists,” and called on her to resign if she did not apologise.
Meanwhile, an opposing open letter, which St Andrews Amnesty International Society estimated to have received 1,106 signatures from students, thanked Maris for her “courageous stance,” and her statement which “inspired a sense of pride in the St Andrews community.” A later open letter released in May 2024 from the University College Union called on the University to divest from institutions “complicit in Israel’s genocide in Gaza” and received 1,072 signatures from staff and students.
The University only publicly responded to the open letter that called for Maris’ resignation, stating: “As the senior management team which leads the University of St Andrews, we are utterly dismayed that the Rector, on this occasion, put her right to freedom of expression ahead of her duty to represent all students, and to be concerned for their welfare.”
In response to claims about her statement leading to some Jewish students having “fears for their safety,” Maris states: “My statement itself did not advocate for violence. The notion that me referring to a global event that everyone was aware of somehow triggers more anti-Semitism, I fundamentally reject and I understand that [some Jewish students] felt uncomfortable. I understand that they felt unsafe.”
“I felt that at the time [that] accusation was more to do with silencing voices like mine.”
At the time Maris released her statement, a letter was signed by 36 UN Special Rapporteurs expressing concerns about war crimes and genocide in Gaza. Since her statement, the International Court of Justice has declared a “plausible genocide” in Gaza. Human Rights organisations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and B’Tselem have concluded that there is “sufficient evidence of genocide” in Gaza.
Maris states: “I think that there is a moral duty to speak up about this, and I think also there is a perspective that comes from being a person of colour in this country, where, so often in narratives around justice and equity, there's this idea that you're not supposed to use certain words because you need to make those in positions of power comfortable with your narrative before it can become [...] part of the mainstream. I've never believed in that. I do not operate on the time scale of a 600-year-old institution.”
When asked if she believes the University tried to censor her, Maris replied: “I think they tried. I don't think they succeeded.”
“I accepted that was the outcome of the report.”
As part of the mediation process following the release of Lady Ross’s report, Maris states that the University sent her three “asks”: “The first one [was] to accept the outcome of the report. The second one [was] to make an apology […] The third one was to accept that I was bound by the Court’s code of conduct.” In response to these, Maris states: “I don’t know [why] they thought that they had the authority to demand [that] someone apologise. But, regardless, I said I would be willing to consider the wording of such an apology.”
“I accepted that [the report] found those findings. I didn’t agree with [the report], but I accepted that was the outcome of the report.”
She states that the University took this criticism of the report as a rejection of it: “If I sent you a twenty-page paper responding to the investigation outlining my concerns and you do nothing to address the substance of what I’ve said, you don’t get to say to me [that] you have to accept it all.”
In their statement announcing Maris’ discharge from the Court, the University said they reached this decision because she “repeatedly declined to accept the conclusion of the investigation.” Vice-Principal Merrill told The Saint that Maris had claimed she was ‘‘independent of all administrative mechanisms in the University,” and this position was why relations broke down.
Maris denies this, saying, “That is categorically not true, I have never said that I'm independent of all governance and administrative mechanisms in the University [...] [The University] have tried time and time again to misrepresent my statements, for reasons I believe are rooted in self-preservation, not a real interest or willingness to engage in transparency and fairness.”
Maris states that she was unfairly criticised in the investigation for a comment she made on Instagram in relation to her statement on Gaza: “I don’t hate Jewish people. Please stop being weird.” The investigation called the comment “contrary to the interests of the University” and was “insulting and discourteous.” Maris said that she posted this comment in the context of the “racially aggravated messages” she was receiving. The University used the report to criticise Maris, declaring in a statement published on 3 December, 2024, “In response to people who raised concerns about antisemitism and the effect of the Rector’s words and actions on Jewish people and students, she told them to “stop being weird.”
Maris responded to this, saying: “I received a message from someone saying that [...] they would make sure I would never be able to get a job and they called me ‘Jew-hating’ Stella. I put out a post on Instagram saying, ‘I do not hate Jewish people. Please stop being weird.’”
“For some reason, the University interpreted that as me saying that directly to Jewish students, which is a ridiculous characterisation.”
“For [the University] to say that I had called Jewish students weird — I'm appalled that they would frame it like that.”
When The Saint asked Vice Principal Merrill if the University took Maris’ social media statements out of context by referring to all Jewish students, he denied this, saying, “I am not going to get into the nit-picking over who it was aimed at.” He stated, “Morag Ross’ report was very clear about the ill-judged nature of a number of Stella’s social media comments [...] We had an independent investigation by one of Scotland’s leading KCs, who is now a judge, and Court accepted that report and its findings in full.”
“It’s deeply irresponsible to have put out a statement like that about a highly visible black woman in this Town.”
In December 2024, Maris, on Instagram, revealed that she had been excluded from the University’s winter graduation ceremonies. She stated that she had been “obliged to initiate a judicial review proceeding on a submission made by the University Court.” The University released a statement in response to her claims, saying: “It is disappointing that Ms Maris has chosen to focus on herself on a day on which the University and everyone associated with it is celebrating the achievements of our graduates. She was informed weeks ago that she would not attend Graduation, but chose to wait to until the ceremonies were underway to complain. The Rector does not have an automatic right to attend Graduation.”
The University’s statement referenced Lady Ross’ report which concluded that Maris had breached her responsibilities as Rector because she “used social media to invite supporters to attack the University,” though this was later edited to say, “she also used social media to invite her supporters to ‘make it harder’ for the University.”
The post in question stated: “You don’t need to be a student to sign but we need more student voices on there so please encourage others to sign [...] These are the voices the University is refusing to acknowledge. Let’s make it harder for them.”
Lady Ross’ investigation criticised this post: “This Instagram message directs its force against the University itself. The Rector is the president of the governing body of the University and, as such, she ought not to have been seeking to drum up support for a campaign directed against the institution itself in which campaign she has a personal interest […] It was in Ms Maris’ own interest to encourage support for the open letter; it was contrary to the interest of the University.”
Maris denies this, stating, “[The University] interpreted it as an attack but what I was asking for was more representation from the students who elected me.” She continues, “There is a narrative of claiming to fear a black woman in a position of power, and framing her as, for example, inciting attacks, inciting violence that I do think runs through this in a way that's not being addressed,” going on to call the University’s response to her statement about the graduations “racial stereotyping”.
Maris added, “So, for me to say, please provide more representation, let's make it harder for them to ignore us — something I have evidence of them doing at the time — there is no way to reasonably interpret that as me calling my supporters to attack the University. I think it's deeply irresponsible to have put out a statement like that about a highly visible black woman in this town.”
In response to her initial statement on the Israel-Palestine conflict, the University stated in November 2023: “We do not believe that the Rector intended to cause harm to students with her message.”
“The decision to remove me [has] a chilling effect on student representation”
On the University Court, while the President of the Students’ Association and Director of Education serve as full-time members, there is currently no student representative in the form of the Rector or Rector’s Assessor. Vice-Principal Merrill justified the current absence of a Rector’s Assessor on the Court: “It was agreed to pause the recruitment of the Rector’s Assessor because it was felt inappropriate for that to carry on whilst there was a separate inquiry going on [...] Court agreed, and Stella did not object to pausing the recruitment of a Rector’s Assessor.” He continued, “[In light of] Stella having decided to take legal action against Court, it’s felt that there would be a fundamental conflict of interest of anyone coming in as Rector's Assessor to represent the Rector and to be party to decisions of a body against which the former Rector, Stella, was taking legal action.”
Merrill claimed that there has been no change in student representation on the Court as the Rector, despite being elected by students, “is not formally a student representative in Court” and conveyed that it “is becoming a ceremonial role.”
Maris believes there is “definitely a vacuum” in student representation, adding that “problems started long before this in terms of structures of the Court and the way that student representation is treated.”
Regarding the role of the Rector, Maris argues that, while it is tied to University governance, the Rector is “supposed to be able to still challenge the University. Whatever they have done now is the manifestation of potentially problematic governance structures, rather than I think a rational, reasoned conversation about the nature of independence in student representation.”
Maris states that while rectors have been traditionally external to the University, more needs to be done to prepare them. She added, “My concern is that one of the reasons that [rectors] aren’t prepared for their role is because [...] it makes them more malleable.”
“The decision to remove me as President of Court and as a Charity trustee was incorrect and I think it does have a chilling effect on student representation because ultimately the students elect the Rector to the role of President. But also, I think that it has a chilling effect on the proper practice of university governance by charity trustees.”
Cam Brown, Association President, told The Saint, “Following the Rector’s dismissal from the University Court, Your Union has been working closely with Stella to support her in continuing to provide pastoral care to students. This has included securing dedicated office space, re-establishing the Rector’s Committee, and hiring a Rector’s Vicarius (Assistant). At the same time, we’ve been collaborating with the University Court to address student concerns around representation. I’m pleased to share that we’ve reached an agreement around a proposal, and I look forward to sharing the details with our members soon, following Court's final approval.”
A University spokesperson said:
“It is false and misleading to imply that Ms Maris was discharged from University Court because she spoke out against Israeli aggression in Gaza. The facts are that she was discharged because she repeatedly and knowingly placed herself in breach of her legal responsibilities as a Court member and charity trustee, not for expressing her political views.
“Court commissioned an independent investigation from Morag Ross KC, as she was then, to examine whether the Rector’s actions and activities were compatible with the responsibilities and standards placed on her as a member of Court, and the legal requirements of a charity trustee. Court unanimously accepted the findings of that investigation in full.
“Over a three-month period, exhaustive efforts were made to reach a resolution with Ms Maris which would have allowed her to remain a member of Court. Ms Maris was asked to acknowledge that some aspects of her behaviour had fallen below the standards expected of a Court member, to agree to be bound by the same obligations and commitments as other Court members and to apologise for the distress and fear experienced by some of the students she represents.
“Ms Maris, however, has repeatedly declined to clearly acknowledge and accept Ms Ross’s finding that she breached her responsibilities. She also declined to take up Court’s offer of facilitated discussion with an independent external mediator.
“Court’s decision has no bearing on Ms Maris’s freedom of speech, which has been acknowledged by the Court at every stage. Ms Maris remains with the role and title of the Rector, and the University has continued to offer her support to enable her to carry out her pastoral responsibilities towards the students she represents.
“For further details and a copy of the independent investigation carried out by Morag Ross KC (as she was then), please refer to the official statement."
Images by University of St Andrews
Brainwashed fanatic with no life experience whatsoever - besides working at Europacar - pretentious enough to consider herself a Middle East expert that forever ruined the office of the Rector. Good work Lady Ross and University.