To think 'academic freedom' and whistleblower punishment are misused in those protesting the suspension of Nathan Cofnas

Many posters have cited 'academic freedom' and 'freedom of expression' as well as 'witch-hunt' in terms of Nathan Cofnas being suspended from the University of Ghent. They've also represented the suspension as punishing a whistle-blower due to his being one of the first to publicly communicate concerns about Jason Arday and plagiarism/academic standards. 200+ academics have signed a letter of protest about the suspension and the American ambassador to Belgium as well as Trump have called for him to be re-hired.

The grounds for his appointment seem to be to work as a post-doc on a Professor's project, so not overseen by the University HR department or a committee in the way a lecturer/professorial appointment would happen.
The work/activities of the Professor in question - Bouke De Vries - had been subject to complaints from his colleagues. When colleagues and students protested about Cofnas being hired Ghent's Rector said dissenting opinions should be allowed in the University.

Ghent have now said the grounds for suspension are due to:

a. He didn't conduct the research he was hired for
[they said 'The projects you publicly and repeatedly associate with your affiliation at Gent University, most notably your
'Guide for the Hereditarian Revolution' which advocates for racial barriers and segregation, fall entirely outside the scope of your official research mandate.']

b. He violated the University's ethics code
['prohibits spreading ideas of racial superiority or inciting racial segregation.']

c. He made statements that violate Belgian anti-discrimination legislation

d. He made remarks about Jason Arday that violate Belgian Criminal Code concerning offences against a person's honour or reputation

e. He caused significant unrest in the workplace by advocating a purge of those academics he thought ideologically wrong

My position as an academic invited to sign the letter of protest against his suspension is that academic freedom/freedom of speech is not unlimited, for example if it involves slander or seeks to assert racial supremacy.

So is this a case of just a few bad eggs slipping through the cracks?
If you mean Cofnas and Arday being appointed - I guess that's to do with HR procedures - maybe not subject to the same scrutiny as other areas.
With Cofnas, he's only had two appointments - both times he behaved so badly that he was fired/suspended. It certainly sounds like his recent appointment lacked the transparency that academics in Ghent were used to - so the usual procedures weren't followed. It could be that the ERC and other funding bodies may now try to regulate the hiring processes for those who work on projects - but it's more usual to trust the institution.
Cambridge seem to be investigating Arday's appointment, so we'll have to see if anything is divulged about that.

If you mean the standards of academic awards and publishing, it does sound like LMJU were pretty sloppy re. Arday's PhD in terms of supervision time, and that he wasn't required to resubmit. In terms of his publishing, 2/33 peer review articles being dodgy isn't a huge number (although not good obviously).

Re. Cofnas - he has a lot of support from ideological fellow-travellers so it's a bit trickier. It behoves universities to define what they mean by academic freedom and that might clarify what the standards are there. If academics have time and are so inclined, actually holding his work and claims up to scrutiny would be worthwhile. It's not hounding, it's what academics do - peer review! And better that than seeming to just call him a 'racist' - just as looking at Arday's work dispassionately and in the context of how plagiarism is defined, its prevalence and so on is worthwhile instead of just calling him 'DEI hire' (or 'retard' or 'random black person').

I haven't worked in the UK in a few years and given the horrific job losses and budget cuts in universities, perhaps corners are being cut in other areas as well. If there's sloppiness, I'd imagine it's due to that more than some imaginary 'woke' take-over.

Well, Tom is welcome - all life is here so Mumsnet is a mixture of helpful, reasonable people, bad faith actors, ignorant/intelligent lay detectives, informed pros, people who just want a rant etc etc.