Oxford Union faces disciplinary review after WhatsApp messages tied to Charlie Kirk death come to light

Oxford University’s prestigious debating society is confronted with a disciplinary review after messages in WhatsApp groups connected to the Oxford Union allegedly celebrated the death of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk and sought to silence those who did not agree with the group’s views, The Spectator reported.

The Spectator said new messages surfaced from WhatsApp chats tied to incoming and current members seeking to join the debating society. In one exchange, a participant reportedly wrote that Mr. Kirk is “looking up at us now” with a smiley face, implying he had gone to hell. In another, a member allegedly stated they did not “feel bad” for Kirk’s grieving widow, Erika Kirk. A separate post appeared to advocate political violence, claiming they could “only hope that some of the more cowardly f*****s get scarred.” The publication described the chats as a potential “lynch mob against any conservative thought” and noted some participants feared personal safety if their identities were revealed.

The controversy intensified with the emergence of comments attributed to the Union’s incoming president, George Abaraonye, 20. In one WhatsApp message to fellow students, Mr. Abaraonye allegedly wrote, “Charlie Kirk got shot, let's f****** go.” He has since deleted the messages and apologized, saying his words “were no less insensitive than Charlie Kirk’s,” and that nobody deserves to be the victim of political violence. The Oxford Union said the complaints about his remarks had been forwarded for disciplinary proceedings and would be addressed “with the utmost seriousness.”

The backlash extended to the Union’s public calendar of appearances. In the wake of the messages, high-profile speakers canceled their engagements at the Oxford Union, including millionaire entrepreneur Josh Wolfe, co-founder of Lux Capital. Wolfe wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, that he was invited to speak on technology and venture capital but withdrew, stating he would stay away “until cultural leadership from the top celebrates peace and coexistence and civil discourse and denounces violence.” The Union’s leadership, now transitioning, publicly condemned the reported words and sentiments, while stressing it does not hold executive power to dismiss a president-elect. The organization said the complaints had been “forwarded for disciplinary proceedings” and would be addressed with seriousness, adding that its current leadership “has no association with, and is entirely independent from,” Mr. Abaraonye, and offered condolences to Kirk’s family.

University of Oxford officials emphasized the institution’s stance as well. A spokesperson said the Oxford Union operates independently of the university and the city’s students’ union, and they deplored threats, intimidation, or any comments endorsing violence, calling such behavior unacceptable and contrary to the values of the community.

In response to the fallout, Mr. Abaraonye spoke to Cherwell, the student newspaper, explaining that he “received the shocking news about a shooting at Charlie Kirk’s event” and that his impulsive comments were made in the moment. He stated that the remarks did not reflect his values and that nobody deserves to be harmed for their political views. He pointed to Kirk’s own rhetoric—describing the deaths of American children from school shootings as an acceptable “cost” of gun rights—as a contextual factor that influenced his reaction, while reiterating his condolences to Kirk’s family and loved ones.

The incidents trace back to Kirk’s shooting as he spoke at a campus event in Utah on September 10. He was struck in the neck by a single bullet and died in hospital. The suspected shooter, Tyler Robinson, 22, appeared in virtual court from Utah County Jail in Spanish Fork on September 16. Reports linked the suspect to a strictly Republican household and noted he was living with a transgender partner at the time, with relatives saying he had become more politically engaged in recent months.

The Oxford Union said it would continue to handle the matter with seriousness, while noting the complexities of attributing leadership misconduct to a single individual. The university has not indicated a timeline for the disciplinary process, and no final outcome had been announced at the time of the reports. The Daily Mail, which sought comment from the University of Oxford, quoted a spokesperson saying the Oxford Union is independent of the University and the Oxford SU, and that the institution deplores threats, intimidation, or endorsements of violence.

As this unfolds, the Oxford Union faces a probe into the conduct of its leadership and the boundaries of free expression on campus, set against a broader national conversation about political rhetoric, violence, and the safety of students involved in political discourse. The organization and its defenders argue that vigorous debate remains a cornerstone of its identity, while critics say a culture of insensitivity and intimidation has real-world consequences for participants and speakers.