A University of Bristol professor has been falsely accused of Islamophobia, sparking a freedom of speech row that has drawn comparisons to other high-profile academic cases.

Professor Steven Greer faced unfounded allegations of insulting Islam and the Koran, despite being completely exonerated after a five-month inquiry.

Free speech and academic groups have now asked the Office for Students to investigate the university's handling of the case.

They highlighted similarities to Sussex University, which received a £585,000 fine for failing to protect academic Kathleen Stock's freedom of speech regarding her views on sex and gender.

The lecturer faced a five-month inquiry where the claims against him were proved to be false

The allegations emerged six months after a classroom discussion about the 2015 Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris, where Islamist terrorists murdered journalists and cartoonists at the satirical magazine.

A student who had not attended the course filed a complaint, which the university pursued despite it being submitted after the three-month deadline.

The university's Islamic Society then published details on social media, falsely claiming Greer had mocked Islam and the Koran.

This triggered an aggressive online campaign against him, with Greer receiving hostile emails and temporarily leaving his home due to safety fears.

He believes the university endangered his life to avoid appearing anti-Muslim.

Despite being wholly exonerated after the five-month inquiry, the university said it "recognised" student concerns and scrapped Greer's module titled "Islam, China and the Far East".

The course had previously received praise from external examiners for its "rigorous and critical" examination of contemporary human rights issues.

When Greer returned from sick leave, the cancellation of his module meant he was relegated to marking duties only.

Greer was part of the University for 36 years

He subsequently retired, though this had been planned before the controversy began.

Greer said: "Not only did they fail to protect me, and failed to deal with the complaint appropriately, they then compounded the risk by equivocating about my innocence.

"By saying they recognised concerns, and taking off the module because of student sensitivities, it looks like a whitewash, like they still had lingering suspicions about me.

"If this doesn't get resolved in some formal satisfactory fashion, the censorship will just carry on."