THE UNIVERSITY of Edinburgh is facing criticism from former student leaders over its decision to appoint Princess Anne, the Princess Royal, as its new Chancellor.

Princess Anne was last month elected as the eighth Chancellor of the University of Edinburgh, replacing her father the Duke of Edinburgh, who has held the post since 1953.

However, the appointment has been attacked by a former Edinburgh University Students’ Association (EUSA) vice president, who called the move a “stitch-up” and accused the university of being “afraid of someone who couldn’t lend them a palace for fine dining.”

The appointment was made by the University’s General Council, a body comprised of former graduates of the University. The Chancellor of the University is responsible for chairing the General Council and nominating an assessor in the University Court

Sir Timothy O’Shea, the vice-chancellor and principal of the University, said, “I am delighted that the Princess Royal is to become our new chancellor and I welcome her to this important role at the heart of university life.”

Dr Alan Brown, convener of the general council’s business committee, said, “I am certain that the appointment of the Princess Royal as chancellor of the University of Edinburgh will be welcomed enthusiastically by all general council members, and it will be of immense benefit to the whole university community.”

Yet former EUSA VP Peter McColl, writing on former EUSA president Adam Ramsay’s Bright Green blog, accused the University of “trying to ensure” no other candidates for the position came forward.

He said, “[The university] used [my email address] to tell me there was a new Chancellor. They didn’t bother to tell me I could nominate a candidate to be Chancellor.

“The University authorities clearly had a candidate in mind and were trying to ensure that no others came forward. It’s the sort of behaviour that made some Parliamentary constituencies in the 19th century known as ‘rotten boroughs’ because of the malign influence of landlords over the electorate. It smacks of anti-democratic stitch up. And it will backfire on the University because their preferred candidate is so inappropriate.”

McColl said that by appointing someone who was not “an internationally renowned academic, a humanitarian champion, a great artist or someone who has made a mark because of their ability” but instead, “someone who owes her place entirely to accident of birth,” the University, “says to intelligent and able people who aren’t of ‘high birth’ that they need not apply to the University of Edinburgh.”

He added, “It says that the University stands for inherited position not earned position. And it sets back the cause of widening participation to those from backgrounds where people don’t tend to go to University even further.”

A spokesperson for the University rejected McColl’s claims, and told The Student that all necessary protocol had been followed. They said, “The election was announced in a public notice in the Scotsman as is required by the regulations. This was repeated at the Half Yearly Meeting of the General Council on February 12 2011 and within Edit (the University’s alumni magazine).”

Former EUSA president Ramsay has publically stated on his blog that he has lodged an official complaint with the University of Edinburgh surrounding the process used to elect the Princess Royal.