The president of the Royal Society has reignited a row over Elon Musk’s association with the body by arguing that fellows should only be ejected for fraud or other defects in their research.

In an interview with the Guardian, Paul Nurse defended the academy’s decision not to take action against Musk – who was elected a fellow in 2008 – despite claims the tech billionaire had violated its code of conduct, including by his role in slashing US research funding as part of the US “department of government efficiency”.

Nurse, who became president of the society for the second time last month, said the code of conduct may need to be looked at, adding: “We elect people for scientific achievement or delivery. And therefore my view is that we get rid of them if that turns out to be false or not correct.”

Musk’s fellowship has become freshly contentious after revelations that his Grok AI tool within X allows the digital removal of clothing from images, including of women and children.

Some fellows have told the Guardian they support Nurse’s view, with the chemist and Nobel laureate Prof Andre Geim adding that he would go further.

“The Royal Society should not expel anyone, full stop. Why? Because expulsion is theatre. The people you want to punish usually do not care,” he said, adding that humans were messy and even brilliant scientists could be awful people.

Geim added that the Musk “obsession” was a perfect example of misplaced effort.

“Is this really the best use of the society’s oxygen? Musk will not notice. His fans will not care. His critics will simply demand the next scalp. Meanwhile, the Royal Society’s actual job, defending the conditions for science in Britain, gets sidelined by a glossy, low-impact row,” he said.

The American chemical engineer and Nobel laureate Prof Frances Arnold also voiced support for Nurse.

She said: “Our widespread dislike of Musk’s positions and behaviour is not a basis for ejection. We need to tolerate speech (and lawful actions) we find distasteful.

“I do not agree that scientific fraud is the only basis for ejection, however. One might consider certain criminal acts, for example.”

However, other fellows have disagreed. One told the Guardian Nurse’s comments brought discredit on the society and made a mockery of its code of conduct.

“The most Nurse has been willing to do has been to write a gently worded letter to Musk suggesting that maybe he would like to reconsider whether his activities are consistent with continued fellowship,” they said. “That shouldn’t be for Musk to decide.”

Another fellow said: “If his activities at Doge and, most recently, allowing his AI to undress women for all to see isn’t bringing science into disrepute I don’t know what is. In short, evil prospers when good men do nothing.”

A third fellow, who also did not wish to be named, added: “Fellowship isn’t lifetime immunity. Scientific institutions have a responsibility to hold members accountable for behaviour that damages public trust in science.”

Prof Peter Somogyi, another fellow, also criticised Musk, including for supporting violent approaches to changing society, adding that Nurse “avoids the hot potato, but it will not go away”.

Members of the wider scientific community have also pushed back. Prof Rachel Oliver of the University of Cambridge has written to Nurse asking him to reconsider his statements in the Guardian and Financial Times, stressing the importance of codes of conduct that make clear that sexual harassment is unethical and will not be tolerated.

“The implications of your words – that under your leadership the only infringements of the code which are likely to receive the sanction of the fellowship being removed are those related to research misconduct – already risk empowering harassers,” she wrote.

A spokesperson for the Royal Society said: “The Royal Society does not tolerate any form of discrimination, harassment or bullying. That is, and will continue to be, enshrined in our code of conduct.”

Stephen Curry, an emeritus professor of structural biology at Imperial College London, who previously coordinated an open letter to the society about Musk, said Nurse’s stance that the academy should not make judgments about the character and behaviour of fellows was a direct contradiction of its code of conduct.

Curry added that the “feebleness and cowardliness” of the society’s response to Musk “riding roughshod over their code and their values” was “truly depressing”.

“It is not the full-throated defence of scientific values that we so desperately need in these troubled times,” he said.

Prof Andrea Sella of University College London, who previously handed back an award from the society in protest, said Musk had amplified a growing anti-science movement, destroyed primary healthcare in the developing world, and was unleashing technologies that created and amplified misinformation and enabled misogynistic and racist attacks, “not to mention making it even harder to address the threat of climate change”.

“I think many of us look to the Royal Society for leadership,” said Sella. “The fellows have failed the scientific community.”