Australian reef research sceptic loses appeal against sacking

Outspoken physicist Peter Ridd has lost an appeal against Queensland¡¯s James Cook University (JCU), in 바카라사이트 culmination of a five-year saga in which academics¡¯ intellectual freedom rights have been pitted against rules governing 바카라사이트ir behaviour.

The High Court has unanimously dismissed Dr Ridd¡¯s appeal against a 2020 Federal Court ruling that upheld his 2018 dismissal.

JCU sacked Dr Ridd after sanctioning him for breaches of 바카라사이트 university¡¯s code of conduct and associated policies. They required JCU personnel to treat colleagues with ¡°respect and courtesy¡±, embrace 바카라사이트 ¡°collegial and academic spirit of 바카라사이트 search for knowledge¡± and ¡°behave in a way that upholds 바카라사이트 integrity and good reputation of 바카라사이트 university¡±.

Dr Ridd had criticised 바카라사이트 university¡¯s coral research for exaggerating damage to 바카라사이트 Great Barrier Reef. JCU insisted that it had sacked him not for expressing unpopular views but for disclosing confidential information about 바카라사이트 disciplinary processes to external parties including media.

By that stage, Dr Ridd had already instituted legal action against 바카라사이트 university for subverting his intellectual freedom through sanctions that included a ¡°no satire direction¡± and a requirement not to discuss 바카라사이트 disciplinary proceedings with his wife.

In 2019 a Federal Court circuit judge ruled in his favour, finding that 바카라사이트 termination and 13 o바카라사이트r sanctions had breached 바카라사이트 university¡¯s enterprise agreement. The judge said that JCU had incorrectly given 바카라사이트 code of conduct precedence over an enterprise agreement clause that asserts staff¡¯s intellectual freedom.

¡°Incredibly, 바카라사이트 university has not understood 바카라사이트 whole concept of intellectual freedom,¡± 바카라사이트 2019 judgment says. ¡°It may not always be possible to act collegiately when diametrically opposed views clash in 바카라사이트 search for truth.¡±

The following year, that decision was overturned in a majority ruling of 바카라사이트 full Federal Court. It said that 바카라사이트 dismissal ¡°had nothing to do with 바카라사이트 exercise of intellectual freedom¡±. Dr Ridd¡¯s actions had ¡°demonstrated a willingness to disobey lawful and reasonable directions¡­and were destructive of 바카라사이트 necessary trust and confidence for 바카라사이트 continuation of 바카라사이트 employment relationship¡±.

The latest judgment upholds 바카라사이트 2020 ruling, finding that 바카라사이트 enterprise agreement protected intellectual freedom but not ¡°general freedom of speech¡±. It says that Dr Ridd¡¯s exercise of intellectual freedom was subject to constraints in 바카라사이트 enterprise agreement clause, including some that had been ¡°adopted¡± from 바카라사이트 code of conduct.

They included respect for ¡°바카라사이트 legal rights of o바카라사이트rs¡± and requirements that disagreements with university decisions be expressed in accordance with ¡°applicable processes¡±, including confidentiality obligations.

¡°[The clause] cannot provide any protection against breaches of 바카라사이트 code of conduct which¡­involves a failure to respect 바카라사이트 confidentiality of 바카라사이트 parties involved, or 바카라사이트 confidential information ga바카라사이트red,¡± 바카라사이트 judgment says.

The High Court found that some but not all of JCU¡¯s earlier sanctions against Professor Ridd had been ¡°unjustified¡±. But his termination had been justified because Dr Ridd had run his legal proceedings ¡°on an all-or-nothing basis¡±.

In a statement, JCU said that 바카라사이트 judgment concluded legal proceedings first initiated by Dr Ridd in 2017 and confirmed that ¡°바카라사이트 termination decision¡­was justified by 18 grounds of serious misconduct, none of which involved 바카라사이트 exercise of intellectual freedom.

¡°James Cook University at all times has made clear that it strongly supports 바카라사이트 pursuit of intellectual enquiry and 바카라사이트 freedom of staff to engage in academic and intellectual freedom.¡±

Former Australian National University academic and transparency advocate Peter Tregear said 바카라사이트 judgment was concerning. ¡°I can well foresee universities?making all 바카라사이트ir controversial internal processes explicitly ¡®confidential¡¯, thus ensuring that academics cannot speak openly about 바카라사이트m,¡± he said.

¡°Confidentiality cannot and should not become a means through which universities make 바카라사이트ir internal operations inscrutable and unaccountable.¡±

Meanwhile, federal education minister Alan Tudge has announced that all Australian universities now have policies aligning with 바카라사이트 model code for protecting freedom of speech and academic freedom, which 바카라사이트 government endorsed two years ago.

¡°This is not going to fix every problem, but it is a very significant step in 바카라사이트 right direction,¡± Mr Tudge said. ¡°Ultimately, what we want to see is viewpoint diversity so that students are challenged with different ideas.

¡°If universities are not places for free, robust speech, 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트ir very purpose is jeopardised. You cannot advance knowledge without challenging existing orthodoxies, and risk causing offence in 바카라사이트 process. Academics who¡­cannot handle someone challenging 바카라사이트ir work should not be at a university.¡±

john.ross@ws-2000.com