Severin Carrell writes a piece in The Guardian, 26 March, 2018, titled: "St. Andrews hits out at Spanish bid to extradite Catalan academic."
"An attack on free speech" is what Professor Sally Mapstone brands Spanish warrant for Clara Punsatí's arrest for crimes against democratic laws.
I wonder what David Hume would have said about St. Andrews´s biased judgement, and defense of a faculty scofflaw.
Ponsati has tried to sever a country. Punsatí is a scofflaw who has trespassed and trampled the Constitution of a democratic country. Ponsatí is a free citizen of a free country who has been permitted to express her ideas at will. She is now a runaway from the law, along with others like her.
St. Andrews is an old and respected university which must abide the truth and the pursuit of academic freedom. Politics and cademic free speech do not mix. But the authorities of the university have decided on the misguided course of taking sides, and the defense of an alleged criminal who must be brought to trial.
Clara Ponsatí should not be a member of the Faculty of St. Andrews until her pending debt with justice is not cleared.
I would ask the Regents of the University to suspend both Clara Punsati and Sally Mapstone from the Faculty.
Will St. Andrews University show impartiality, and regard for its student body and Faculty? I hope so.
Catherine Stihler does not seem to understand what the Cademic world is all about. She tries to interfere with Courts of Law and Justice. A university should never side with a scofflaw.
It may well be that Scottish Universities now worship outlaws and have become defenders of lawbreakers. Again, I wonder what David Hume would have said about this.