Controversies over restrictions on freedom of expression have plagued universities for years, but have been thrust back into the spotlight by the coronavirus pandemic. Hamas’ attack on Israel in October 2023 and subsequent retaliatory actions in Gaza, followed by an increase in pro-Palestinian protests and anti-Semitic incidents, have further intensified the debate.
However, when university leaders take positions and guide actions on high-profile public issues, the interpretation and application of these expression rights is subject to intense scrutiny. A hostile interrogation by a Congressional committee in December of the presidents of three of America’s leading universities and subsequent public condemnation showed how the actions of academics on campus are under intense scrutiny.
For decades, academic freedom and freedom of expression have been considered fundamental rights. However, recently observed tensions demonstrate that these issues are not simple, given the fragile relationships between universities, funders, and their communities.
Freedom of speech is a right in many countries. This is regulated and not university specific. Academic freedom is often thought of as part of freedom of speech, a distinct principle that is important to the university’s overall enterprise of producing, interrogating, and disseminating knowledge. Academic freedom allows for and encourages critical thinking and dialogue, which is central to the essence of the university.
University leaders recognize that when people try to freely express opposing views, conflict is likely to occur across campus. Nevertheless, we encourage students, staff, the University community, and guests to engage in free, respectful and civil expression and discussion of ideas. Similarly, we allow people to disagree, sometimes loudly, with the opinions of others. As long as the person is allowed to speak, such opposition does not amount to suppression of free speech or academic freedom.
However, while freedom of speech is a fundamental right that we must protect, we must also recognize that universities are not “public” spaces in the same way as city halls or city squares. Universities can consider broader issues when considering who to allow to speak on campus.
Different universities interpret and apply the principles of academic freedom slightly differently. Waipapa Taumata Rau University in Auckland supports our employees to participate in public debate and dialogue on matters relating to their expertise and experience. We also offer a wide range of support to academics who are the subject of abuse or harassment.
However, while academics have the right to express their opinions freely in the public domain, they must act within the bounds of law and institutional policy. Justice Robert French of the High Court of Australia said in the 2019 Model Code that academic freedom is “subject only to any prohibitions, restrictions or conditions” such as may be imposed by law. It is provided for by “the necessary reasonable and proportionate regulations” to carry out educational and research activities, promote the welfare of students and staff, and give effect to the university’s legal obligations.
Examples of “reasonable and appropriate” restrictions include University and staff obligations under health and safety legislation and codes of conduct. Therefore, academic freedom is not an unlimited right. As an honest employer, the University constantly adjusts and balances all of these competing rights and obligations. Therefore, academics may need to take steps to keep their private lives out of the public eye, and occasionally suppress their public statements, especially on social media.
While politicians, officials, and the public consider the application of freedom of expression and academic freedom, I am concerned about the impact of freedom of expression within institutions of higher education. Academics can complain about their inability to truly freely advance and challenge controversial ideas without fear of being publicly attacked or silenced by their colleagues. is increasing.
This is due to the actions of some people, which effectively cooled the views of others. The core role of universities is to provide a safe forum for the open exchange of ideas, and we must be vigilant in exercising that. It is the duty of the academy to support and enable lively academic debate and thereby enhance academic freedom.
It’s about creating a culture on campus to make this happen. No one, not even leaders in academia or higher education, can do this. It is the responsibility of all of us, it has been passed down to us from past generations, and it is what we must secure for future generations.
Dawn Freshwater is Vice-Chancellor at the University of Auckland.