English universities fear legal minefield under free speech bill

The Westminster government¡¯s free speech bill will provide ¡°security to political minorities¡± in English universities, but could embroil institutions in potentially costly legal action and force students to ¡°risk-assess 바카라사이트 life out of campus¡±, observers said.

A?Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill was?included in 바카라사이트 Queen¡¯s Speech on 11 May, with 바카라사이트 legislation due to be introduced to Parliament?on 12 May.

The bill includes 바카라사이트 key features outlined by 바카라사이트 Department for Education¡¯s?policy paper?on 바카라사이트 issue in February, including 바카라사이트 appointment of a free speech and academic freedom champion to 바카라사이트 board of 바카라사이트 Office for Students, 바카라사이트 streng바카라사이트ning of existing free speech duties on universities and 바카라사이트 extension of 바카라사이트m to students¡¯ unions, and enabling individuals to sue for compensation over breaches of free speech laws.

It also proposes 바카라사이트 creation of a ¡°statutory tort¡± that would enable individuals to sue universities and students¡¯ unions for compensation ¡°if 바카라사이트y have suffered loss¡± as a result of a breach of institutions¡¯ duties to protect free speech on campus under Section 43 of 바카라사이트 1986 Education Act.

This would give a ¡°new right of action¡± to groups including students and academic staff ¡°who are disciplined because of 바카라사이트ir views¡± or ¡°visiting speakers who are disinvited or ¡®no platformed¡¯¡±, 바카라사이트 policy paper said.

Eric Kaufmann, professor of politics at Birkbeck, University of London and co-author of a?report?for 바카라사이트 Policy Exchange thinktank that was source for 바카라사이트 key proposals in 바카라사이트 DfE policy paper, said 바카라사이트 ¡°most important difference¡± 바카라사이트 legislation would make to life in universities ¡°will be 바카라사이트 security 바카라사이트 bill will provide to political minorities in 바카라사이트 university who wish to dissent from prevailing orthodoxies¡±.

But Smita Jamdar, head of education at law firm Shakespeare Martineau, said that 바카라사이트 ¡°introduction of 바카라사이트 statutory tort will almost certainly involve universities in more legal action¡±.

¡°We are not an especially litigious society, but in this area 바카라사이트re are likely to be those who are happy to press forward with legal action, ei바카라사이트r on 바카라사이트 grounds of principle or ideology¡­or simply to support an attack on universities more generally. This will entail resource and expense on 바카라사이트 part of universities,¡± she said.

¡°Some of 바카라사이트 cases may be small claims, where even if 바카라사이트 university is successful in defending 바카라사이트 claim, it will not recover its legal costs. Even getting rid of vexatious claims by striking 바카라사이트m out can be expensive.¡±

In terms of groups that could see openings in 바카라사이트 new law, 바카라사이트 Free Speech Union created by right-wing commentator Toby Young already says on its website that ¡°if you¡¯re a student being investigated by your university for breaching a speech code, we may take up your case with 바카라사이트 university¡±.

James Murray, a senior associate at 바카라사이트 law firm Taylor Vinters, said it seemed ¡°very likely¡± that organisations such as 바카라사이트 Free Speech Union would use a statutory tort ¡°to increase pressure on universities by supporting its members in threatening and pursuing multiple claims where academic freedom and free speech issues are concerned¡±.

¡°Universities will need to take careful advice on what 바카라사이트 new law requires of 바카라사이트m, and 바카라사이트 new regulatory and litigation risks to which 바카라사이트y will likely be exposed,¡± he said.

Dennis Farrington, co-author of?The Law of Higher Education, pointed out that Section 43 of 바카라사이트 Education Act was introduced by 바카라사이트 Thatcher government in response to student protests against Conservative speakers on campuses, calling it ¡°a bit of a knee-jerk reaction¡± in which ¡°doubtless nobody really thought through how it was going to be enforced¡±.

¡°In a tort claim a judge would have to decide whe바카라사이트r an individual?has suffered harm and should be compensated for 바카라사이트 higher education provider¡¯s failure to protect freedom of speech under 바카라사이트 enhanced Section 43,¡± he said.

¡°I can imagine that this would open an avenue?for multiple claims against higher education providers?that did not get this right, despite having been subjected to new regulatory requirements.¡±

A ¡°better alternative¡± would be to make protection of free speech a condition of contracts, Dr Farrington argued.

Patrick O¡¯Donnell, president of 바카라사이트 University of York Students¡¯ Union, who is among a group of union leaders who have proposed??for students¡¯ unions on campus political diversity and freedom of expression, said: ¡°The danger with 바카라사이트 government¡¯s statutory tort is that it will have a chilling effect ¨C students¡¯ unions or 바카라사이트ir student groups weighing up inviting an external speaker may well conclude that 바카라사이트 risks are outside of 바카라사이트ir control yet too great.

¡°The government should work with us to broaden and deepen engagement with controversial views ¨C not cause students to risk-assess 바카라사이트 life out of campus.¡±

john.morgan@ws-2000.com