Professor Laura Murphy Receives Apology from Sheffield Hallam Over Human Rights Study Dispute

Sheffield Hallam University has now apologised to an American scholar whose inquiry into human rights abuses was previously obstructed. This case has raised broader questions about academic freedom in relation to higher education and foreign government pressures directed at universities. Late in 2024, the university in question rejected Professor Murphy's study on the forced labour of Uyghur Muslims, which focused on human rights and contemporary slavery. This decision, according to reports from The Guardian and BBC News, followed a sequence of targeted harassment and intimidation allegedly orchestrated by Chinese security services.

In this context, university staff based in mainland China were reportedly approached by intelligence officials. At the same time, access to Sheffield Hallam’s website was blocked for over two years, which was said to have harmed student recruitment. Internal emails later revealed that university management was caught between maintaining commercial interests in China and publishing the research.

After a period working for the United States government, Professor Murphy returned to Sheffield Hallam in early 2025. She claimed that university administrators informed her that research on forced labour or China would no longer be permitted. She subsequently began legal proceedings, citing repeated infringements of her academic freedom. Her solicitor, Ms Claire Powell of Leigh Day, stated that the university had acted unlawfully by interfering with Murphy’s academic work over two years. Powell described the situation as “deeply disturbing”, alleging that the university had prioritised commercial interests over the rights of its staff. This has reignited debate around the ethics and governance of university research.

Soon afterwards, Sheffield Hallam University issued an apology to Professor Murphy and reaffirmed its support for her research. The university also restated its commitment to freedom of speech and academic freedom within the law. A university spokesperson explained that the decision to halt the research was made under difficult circumstances, including the inability to secure professional indemnity insurance.

This insurance issue was linked to a defamation case brought by a Hong Kong garment company named in a report on forced labour published in 2023. A preliminary ruling from the High Court in London found the report to be defamatory, placing the university in an even more difficult position. The apology came shortly after new free speech legislation was introduced in England in August. Arif Ahmed, the free speech champion at the Office for Students, warned that universities could face scrutiny from the regulator if they yielded to foreign influence over sensitive research topics. This has prompted further discussion about the culture of free speech in relation to university research in both the UK and the US.

A spokesperson for the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office stated that any attempt by a foreign state to intimidate or harass individuals in Britain would not be tolerated. The government confirmed that it had raised the matter with Beijing and referred to new powers under the National Security Act designed to prevent such interference. Meanwhile, the Chinese Embassy in London criticised the university’s previous reports on Xinjiang as flawed and claimed that some authors had received funding from US agencies. Professor Murphy stated that she had received support from various American research bodies throughout her career, including the US Department of Justice and the National Endowment for the Humanities.

The embassy also challenged the credibility of Murphy’s work, arguing that the forced labour allegations could not withstand basic fact-checking. These statements have added further complexity to the case and highlight the real challenges facing international research collaboration in higher education. Overall, this incident has drawn attention to how UK universities safeguard academic freedom and manage research restrictions, particularly when operating across borders. It raises important questions about international collaboration in academia and the balance between ethical research and global partnerships.

Editor’s Note:

The troubling case involving Professor Laura Murphy and Sheffield Hallam University serves as a stark reminder of the delicate balance between academic freedom and institutional risk in today’s globalised higher education landscape. The university’s apology, while necessary, arrived only after significant reputational damage and a prolonged silence that left key questions unanswered. It is deeply concerning that a UK university would suppress legitimate research in response to political pressure from abroad. The notion that commercial interests and access to international markets could override the right to pursue and publish evidence-based research sets a dangerous precedent. Universities must not allow global ambitions to compromise their core academic values. Furthermore, the timing of the apology, just after the introduction of new free speech legislation, raises questions about whether the response was driven by principle or regulatory pressure. Regardless of the motivation, it underscores the urgent need for robust protections for academic freedom, especially when research touches on politically sensitive issues. This case also illustrates the growing complexity of international collaboration in academia. As universities expand their global partnerships, they must be prepared to defend their researchers against external interference. Ethical governance of research must be embedded in institutional decision-making, even when the stakes are high.

Skoobuzz underscores that if universities are to remain credible voices in global debates on human rights, justice, and international policy, they must be willing to stand firm in defence of their academics. Failure to do so risks eroding public trust and undermining the very foundations of academic life.

FAQs

1. Why did Sheffield Hallam University apologise to the American academic?

Sheffield Hallam University apologised to Professor Laura Murphy after previously blocking her research into alleged human rights abuses. The university acknowledged that its decision had affected her academic freedom and reaffirmed its commitment to supporting her work.

2. What was the research dispute between Sheffield Hallam and the US scholar about?

The dispute centred on Professor Murphy’s study into forced labour practices involving Uyghur Muslims. The university refused to publish the research in 2024, reportedly following pressure from Chinese security services and concerns over reputational and legal risks.

3. How do UK universities handle academic freedom and research restrictions?

UK universities are expected to uphold academic freedom, but this case shows how external pressures—such as political influence or commercial interests—can complicate decision-making. The incident has sparked debate on university research ethics and governance.

4. What were the consequences of blocking the research?

Blocking the research led to internal conflict, legal action, and reputational damage. Staff in China were reportedly approached by intelligence officials, and the university’s website was inaccessible in mainland China for over two years, affecting student recruitment.

5. What legal action did Professor Murphy take?

After returning to Sheffield Hallam in 2025, Professor Murphy began legal proceedings, claiming her academic freedom had been repeatedly restricted. Her solicitor argued that the university had unlawfully prioritised commercial interests over academic integrity.

6. What role did defamation concerns play in the university’s decision?

The university cited difficulties in securing professional indemnity insurance due to a defamation case brought by a Hong Kong garment company named in a 2023 report. A preliminary High Court ruling found the report defamatory, adding legal pressure to the university’s position.

7. How does free speech affect university research in the UK and US?

New free speech laws in England, introduced in August 2025, require universities to protect academic freedom. The Office for Students warned institutions not to yield to foreign influence. This case has reignited discussions on academic freedom in higher education across both countries.

8. What was the UK government’s response to the incident?

A government spokesperson stated that any attempt by a foreign state to intimidate individuals in the UK would not be tolerated. The matter was raised with Beijing, and new powers under the National Security Act were cited as part of the government’s response.

9. How did the Chinese Embassy react to the research?

The Chinese Embassy in London criticised the reports on Xinjiang, calling them flawed and alleging that some authors received funding from US agencies. Professor Murphy confirmed she had received support from various American research bodies for her work.

10. What are the challenges of international research collaboration in higher education?

This case highlights the risks of conducting sensitive research across borders. Political interference, legal threats, and commercial pressures can all impact international collaboration in academia, making ethical governance more important than ever.