In early May 2024, students at the University of Alberta and the University of Calgary established protest encampments on their respective campuses. Following movements across the world, organisers coordinated their encampments in the early morning hours of May 9. These demonstrations were a show of solidarity with Gaza calling for their universities to divest from companies associated with the war in Palestine. Despite the peaceful nature of these protests, both universities responded with unprecedented force. The Edmonton Police Service (EPS) and the Calgary Police Service (CPS), acting on the universities’ behest, moved in to dismantle the encampments, leading to a dramatic and controversial series of events that were heavily criticised by both the national and international community. This article explores the coordinated efforts of these student protests, the forceful responses by university administrations, and the broader implications for the right to protest and the role of police in academic institutions.

Edmonton: EPS and University of Alberta’s response

On May 9 at 5 a.m. students from the University of Alberta, in collaboration with McEwan University students, established their protest encampment in unison with their counterparts at the University of Calgary to demonstrate the united message of students from the province. Nour Salhi, the media spokesperson for the Edmonton encampment, explained that the protest was organized to demand that the university divest from companies tied to the Israeli conflict and to express solidarity with Gaza. Despite the peaceful intentions of the protest, the response from the university administration and the police was swift and severe.

From the moment the encampment was set up, university security interacted with the protesters, initially in a seemingly supportive manner, offering supplies and ensuring that the protest remained nonviolent. However, the administration quickly issued multiple notices citing policy violations and warning of potential consequences. Salhi described how the protesters received these notices but were told by campus security that they were formalities and did not change the situation.

Despite assurances from campus security that the police would not intervene as long as the encampment remained peaceful, the situation escalated two days later on the morning of May 11. At approximately 4:30 a.m., EPS officers arrived and demanded that the protesters dismantle the encampment and leave. When the protesters refused, stating their demands had not been addressed, the police moved in with force.

Nour described the scene as chaotic and distressing: “The police arrived early in the morning, and they came prepared for confrontation. It was clear they intended to remove us by any means necessary.” 

“The police broke through our line of defense with batons and force,” Salhi recounted. “They were shoving into the encampments, throwing tables and chairs, and stomping on tents. Some tents still had people inside when the police breached the camp.”

The police used OC powder and pepper bullets to disperse the protesters, showing little regard for their safety. The brutality extended beyond the campus grounds as the police pushed protesters into the nearby River Valley, continuing to use force and even making arrests. This heavy-handed approach left many feeling betrayed by the university administration, who had given the green light for the police action, and by the government, following a statement from Premier Danielle Smith supporting similar actions at U of C.

Salhi emphasized the contrast between this response and previous protests in Edmonton, such as the Camp Peckiwewin encampment, which lasted over 100 days without such severe police intervention. “The level of brutality from the police was shocking,” she said. “It was clear this reaction was specifically due to the subject matter of our protest.”

Three arrests were made during the operation, with charges including assaulting a peace officer, trespassing, and obstruction. Notably, none of those arrested were University of Alberta students​.

In response to the public outcry, the EPS issued formal statements defending their actions. According to the EPS, the decision to intervene was made to ensure public safety and uphold campus regulations. “Our primary concern was maintaining order and preventing any potential escalation of violence,” an EPS spokesperson stated. “The use of force was deemed necessary to safely dismantle the encampment after repeated warnings were ignored by the protesters.”

The EPS also highlighted that their actions were conducted under the authority and at the request of the University of Alberta administration. “We acted in accordance with the university’s directive and in consultation with campus security,” the statement continued. “Our officers were instructed to clear the encampment in a manner that prioritized the safety of all individuals involved, including the protesters.”

Despite these assertions, the testimonies of the students and the visible evidence of the force used during the intervention paint a starkly different picture. The contrast between the university’s public commitment to free speech and the reality of their response raises critical questions about the true priorities of academic institutions and their role in upholding — or suppressing — students’ rights.

Calgary: CPS and the University of Calgary’s forceful response

At the University of Calgary, a similar scene unfolded. The Calgary Police Service (CPS), acting at the behest of the university administration, intervened to dismantle the protest encampment on the very evening the encampment was set up. The CPS’s involvement was particularly controversial, with many accusing the university of using the police as their private security force to stifle dissent.

Katelyn Anderson, the media spokesperson for the Calgary encampment, described the situation as “overwhelming and disheartening.” She noted the striking similarities in the police tactics used in Edmonton and Calgary. “It felt like the University of Calgary was using the CPS as their private police force,” she remarked. “Our right to protest and assemble peacefully was completely disregarded.”

The encampment in Calgary, set up simultaneously with Edmonton’s at 5 a.m. on May 9, aimed to send a unified message of solidarity and demand divestment from companies linked to the Israeli conflict. The university administration’s response was swift, issuing a trespass notice and threatening legal consequences. By 8 p.m. that same day, the CPS moved in to dismantle the encampment.

“The day started off beautifully,” Anderson recalled. “We met around 5 a.m. and got to campus shortly after, setting up our tents and watching the support grow throughout the day. We had community members coming from all over the city, offering support, and we even had a prayer and a call from Gaza. It felt like we were building something meaningful.”

However, the mood shifted dramatically in the evening. Anderson detailed the events: “We started hearing whispers around 7 p.m. that the university had called in the police. There was no official word from the administration, but soon enough, the police presence was undeniable. They arrived in riot gear around 8 p.m., and it was a bewildering sight. We were just students and community members standing up for a cause we believed in, yet here were dozens of officers, prepared for a confrontation.”

The police initially asked the protesters to dismantle the encampment voluntarily. “We had a discussion among ourselves and decided to stand our ground,” Anderson said. “We linked arms and continued our chants and songs, hoping to peacefully demonstrate our commitment.”

As the night progressed, the situation escalated. “The police advanced on us with batons and shields,” Anderson recounted, her voice filled with emotion. “They were aggressive, hitting us on the head, kicking our legs, and pushing us back. They used tear gas and pepper ball guns, which caused chaos and fear among us. The flashbang grenades were the worst — explosions and bright lights everywhere. It was terrifying.”

Anderson sustained a concussion during the confrontation. “I wasn’t expecting them to be so violent,” she said. “I thought they might arrest us, but not hurt us. I was wrong. The police hit me on the head, and I was disoriented. At one point, I thought I was going to die. I ran for my life.”

The University of Calgary president, Ed McCauley, issued a statement following the incident. “Unfortunately, counter-protesters showed up, also putting themselves in violation of our policies and in a trespass situation. The situation very quickly devolved into shoving, projectiles being thrown at officers, and ultimately, flashbangs and arrests,” McCauley said. Despite his statement, many students and protestors felt that the university’s actions were disproportionate to the situation.

“McCauley’s statement didn’t reflect the reality on the ground,” Anderson countered. “There were no significant counter-protesters. It felt like an excuse to justify the police’s excessive use of force. The administration didn’t engage with us directly — they just sent in the police to silence us.”

In response to the public outcry, the CPS issued formal statements defending their actions. “Our officers were deployed to ensure public safety and uphold campus regulations,” a CPS spokesperson stated. “The use of force was necessary to prevent any potential escalation of violence and to maintain order.”

The fallout from the incident has been significant. “Many of us felt betrayed by the university,” Anderson reflected. “I’ve been at the University of Calgary for years, and I love this place. But to see it act against its own students like this — it’s heartbreaking. We’re still meeting regularly, and our demands haven’t changed. We’re calling for transparency, divestment, and better mental health support for students. The fight isn’t over.”

The incident has sparked calls for an independent investigation into the actions of both the university administration and the CPS. “We need to understand the full extent of the coordination between the university and the police,” Anderson insisted. “This isn’t just about our encampment — it’s about protecting the right to protest and ensuring that universities remain places where free speech and peaceful assembly are respected.”

As students and activists continue to push for accountability and change, the events at the University of Calgary serve as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggle for justice and the need to protect fundamental rights within academic institutions.

Opinion section

Historical Context

Historically, university protests have played a critical role in social movements, from the anti-apartheid protests to anti-war demonstrations. Previous encampments at both the University of Alberta and the University of Calgary were not met with such forceful responses, prompting questions about the motives behind this year’s actions. The demographic of the protesters, predominantly students of colour, has led to speculation from encampment mobilizers about whether racial biases influenced the severity of the police response.

The handling of these protests reflects broader issues about the infringement of student rights and the role of universities as spaces for free expression. The aggressive tactics used against peaceful protestors, coupled with administrative support for these measures, suggest a troubling trend toward suppressing dissent. As universities and police forces continue to navigate these complex issues, the balance between maintaining order and respecting civil liberties remains a contentious and critical debate.

What this means for the right to protest

The dismantling of protest encampments at the University of Alberta and the University of Calgary by police forces, sanctioned by university administrations, underscores a growing concern about the right to protest and the role of police in academic institutions. These actions not only infringe on students’ rights but also raise critical questions about the balance of power and the true role of law enforcement in society. As the debate continues, it is imperative to uphold the fundamental principles of free speech and peaceful assembly, ensuring that universities remain bastions of open dialogue and critical thought.

The coordinated response to these encampments highlights a troubling trend where universities, instead of engaging with student concerns, resort to using police force to silence dissent. This approach not only undermines the principles of free speech and peaceful assembly but also sends a chilling message to students: their voices are less important than maintaining a certain public image.

Premier Danielle Smith’s comments further highlight the government’s stance on these protests. In response to the University of Calgary incident, Smith expressed her support for the police action, stating, “I’m glad that the University of Calgary made the decision that they did.” She added that while peaceful protest is acceptable, rules must be followed, and the students’ education should not be disrupted​.

This stance, however, seems to overlook the essence of peaceful protest and the importance of open dialogue within academic spaces. The quick recourse to police intervention, as seen in both Edmonton and Calgary, suggests a broader reluctance to address the underlying issues raised by the students. The fundamental rights to free speech and peaceful assembly are cornerstones of democratic societies, and their erosion within academic institutions sets a dangerous precedent.

A national reflection on the right to protest 

The events at the University of Alberta and the University of Calgary are part of a larger national discourse on the right to protest, academic freedom, and the role of law enforcement in maintaining order on university campuses. The recent decision by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to grant the University of Toronto an injunction to clear a pro-Palestinian encampment, coupled with McGill University’s failed injunction attempts, underscores the varying judicial approaches to managing campus protests across Canada.

At the University of Toronto, Justice Markus Koehnen ruled that protesters must dismantle their encampment by 6 p.m. on July 3, granting Toronto police the authority to arrest anyone who does not comply. This ruling allowed demonstrations to continue throughout the campus but prohibited camping and erecting structures. U of T President Meric Gertler emphasized that the court order returns the campus to the entire university community and prevents one group from controlling a shared space. Protesters, however, viewed this decision as an attempt to silence their voices and criticized the university’s reliance on legal force.

Meanwhile, McGill University in Montreal faced a different outcome. A Quebec Superior Court judge, Justice Marc St-Pierre, rejected McGill’s request for an injunction to remove a pro-Palestinian encampment, stating that the university failed to justify the urgent need to dismantle the camp. This decision acknowledged the protesters’ right to peaceful assembly and highlighted the importance of balancing property rights with civil liberties.

In Waterloo, the university has taken a different approach by suing student protesters for $1.5 million in damages and entering mediation talks. This move, while aiming to end the encampment, also signals a willingness to engage in dialogue and explore legal avenues to resolve conflicts.

As universities and law enforcement agencies navigate these challenges, the fundamental principles of free speech and peaceful assembly remain at the forefront of this national conversation.