This post was updated July 7 at 10:06 p.m.

Draft agreements and negotiation guidance obtained by the Daily Bruin revealed the UC’s approach to negotiating with pro-Palestine protesters.

In the wake of Oct. 7, recent protests across the UC system have called for divestment from companies associated with Israel, academic boycotts of Israel studies centers and amnesty for students previously arrested while protesting, among other demands. While some campuses have reached agreements with demonstrators, others have not announced having done so.

In response to violence at a UC Berkeley protest in 2011, Mark Yudof, who was at the time the UC president, commissioned a new report on prospective reforms to the University’s approach to policing protests. That document – the 2012 Robinson-Edley report – recommended that campuses negotiate with demonstrators rather than use law enforcement and said violence between protesters and police often starts because of a breakdown of communication.

“Students and faculty on some campuses also recommended that administrators make an effort to interact casually with students on a routine basis,” the report said. “In their view, if students trusted administrators more, it might be easier to engage in dialogue rather than civil disobedience. In addition, when civil disobedience occurs, it might be easier to negotiate an end to it.”

The report also acknowledged benefits of campuses addressing the causes behind protests and demonstrators’ demands in their responses.

Jeff King, a professor of law at University College London and an expert on best practice guidelines for universities dealing with political protests, said it is important universities consider protesters’ demands. He added that he believes targeted divestment – something usually within the discretion of investment teams – should be on the table for negotiations.

“It’s important that universities listen to the political views of people that have political protests,” King said. “There’s a special obligation to respond when it’s not just a political matter in general, but it’s something that suggests that the university itself is doing something wrong.”

[Related: UC Regents disclose investments in weapons manufacturers amid calls to divest]

UCLA reported that it had reached 100% compliance with the Robinson-Edley reports’ recommendation to implement formal mediation training for staff members in November 2013.

Following the report, some UC campuses have attempted to negotiate with pro-Palestine protesters in 2024.

In a draft agreement obtained by the Daily Bruin, UC Irvine offered protesters who had set up an encampment on their campus the opportunity to meet university foundation trustees and senior members of the chancellor’s cabinet, along with amnesty for students and faculty involved with the encampment. In exchange, the protesters would have agreed to end the encampment May 1.

However, protesters at UCI did not accept the draft agreement.

“The University commits that no student, faculty or community member who has engaged in the encampment will face student conduct, academic personnel or criminal charges for their involvement in the encampment,” the May 1 draft agreement said.

[Related: UCLA community organizes encampment in response to national call for escalation]

Students involved with the Palestine solidarity encampment at UCLA also attempted to negotiate with administration officials.

Graeme Blair, a member of Faculty for Justice in Palestine at UCLA, said although protest leaders have asked to meet campus administrators since the start of the encampment, they have often been met with delays or refusals to negotiate.

“Since students started organizing after the war in Gaza began, and especially since April 24, when the encampment opened, UCLA leaders have had an opportunity to talk with their own students about their concerns about university involvement in this genocide,” said Blair, an associate professor of political science.

He added that the administration refused to commit to not bringing additional charges against members of the negotiating team. Administrators at universities including Cornell University are alleged to have used participation in negotiations as evidence during student conduct hearings.

Blair said he believes the university also acted in bad faith by requesting to negotiate with faculty about the protests without students present and releasing vague claims about the extent to which the UCLA Foundation invests in companies associated with Israel.

At UCLA, Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Darnell Hunt visited the Palestine solidarity encampment May 1.

At that meeting, Hunt claimed he was not authorized to negotiate regarding university foundation investments and told protesters that the university had called the police to disperse the encampment, Blair said. The Daily Bruin was unable to confirm what Hunt said or if he attempted to negotiate with protesters.

Protesters at UCLA did not reach an agreement with administrators and law enforcement forcefully swept and dismantled the encampment May 1 and May 2.

“Over the past several days, we communicated with and made a formal request to meet with demonstration leaders to discuss options for a peaceful and voluntary disbanding of the encampment,” Chancellor Gene Block said in a May 2 written statement. “Unfortunately, that meeting did not lead to an agreement.”

Students for Justice in Palestine at UCLA did not respond to requests for comment.

[Related: Hundreds of protesters detained after police breach pro-Palestine encampment at UCLA]

Unlike at UCI, on May 3, protesters at UC Riverside signed an agreement to disband the pro-Palestine encampment on their campus. In exchange, their administration agreed to create an ethical investment task force, disclose publicly available university investments and make changes to their study abroad programs.

“This agreement does not change the realities of the war in Gaza, or the need to address antisemitism, Islamophobia and other forms of bias and discrimination,” UCR Chancellor Kim Wilcox said in a May 3 message. “However, I am grateful that we can have constructive and peaceful conversations on how to address these complex issues.”

While the UC Office of the President has helped campus chancellors coordinate on their responses to protests, UC President Michael Drake has not been part of negotiating with individual protest groups, said UCOP spokesperson Rachel Zaentz in an emailed statement.

However, Blair said Drake invited student protest leaders at UCLA to a meeting after the sweep of the first encampment, but UCOP later refused to schedule that meeting after the protest leaders had already made plans to travel to Sacramento.

Drake also issued guidelines May 9 prohibiting campus chancellors from offering amnesty to students or protesters who have participated in “destructive actions that restrict access to shared spaces.” The UC Board of Regents reaffirmed these guidelines in a May 16 vote.

“Any member of the university community who is arrested for unlawful behavior or cited for a violation of university policy must go through the applicable review process, such as student code of conduct or employee disciplinary process,” the guidelines stated.

However, the Robinson-Edley report had discouraged the use of blanket policies mandating the use of student conduct processes against protesters.

“There is enough disagreement about the viability of using student conduct processes to address civil disobedience that we do not believe we can require its use on all campuses and in all protest situations,” the report said.

King also said although he was not familiar with UC-specific statutes, universities generally should be in a position to offer amnesty from student and employee conduct processes to demonstrators.

However, he added that universities are not able to offer amnesty from legal proceedings once protesters are arrested. Blair said the university could still advocate with the District Attorney for the charges to be dropped, something he is calling on the university to do.

[Related: Students face conduct hearings, graduation uncertainty after encampment arrests]

Protesters at UC Berkeley still reached an agreement with their campus administration May 14, with Chancellor Carol Christ pledging to review the individual campus’ investments.

“I strongly support, as I have always supported, investigating the alignment of UC Berkeley’s investments with our institution’s core values,” she said in a letter addressed to demonstrators at UC Berkeley. “Those values include a respect for equality, human rights, a commitment to fostering the conditions for human growth and development, and an abhorrence of war.”

Christ also said in the letter that she does not support academic boycotts, after protesters at UC Berkeley called on the university to academically boycott Israel. While the initial encampment at UC Berkeley was disbanded, protests continued on the campus days after the agreement was reached.

Zaentz said in an emailed statement that the UC Office of the President has opposed calls to divest from Israel, which is the lead demand protesters have across campuses. UC investments, including retirement and pension funds, are controlled by a systemwide chief investment officer.

“Divestments and boycotts of Israel stifle open and free dialogue on complex issues of global importance,” she said in the statement. “Providing a stable and growing revenue stream that benefits current and retired employees and supports the University’s education, research, and public service mission remains the priority for the University’s investments.”

Faculty are considering advocating through the academic senate for the divestment of university pension funds from Israel, said Blair, a member of the senate. He added that he would like to see campus administrators negotiate with protesters in a similar way to what happened at UC Berkeley and UCI.

“EVCP Hunt has an opportunity in the coming months of being interim chancellor to take a different direction than Chancellor Block did,” he said. “He’s in a position to use his power to advocate for negotiating with students in a way that Chancellor Block didn’t.”