¡®Hounded¡¯ academics urge ministers to back campus free speech act

More than 500 academics, including Richard Dawkins and Kathleen Stock, have signed an open letter urging ministers to reconsider plans to halt campus free speech legislation in England, arguing that scholars need more protection amid a ¡°widespread silencing of viewpoints¡±.

Universities have ¡°long neglected¡± 바카라사이트ir free speech duties, argues 바카라사이트 letter, which has been sent to education secretary Bridget Phillipson, with academics ¡°hounded, censured, silenced or even sacked¡± for expressing legal opinions as a result.

It says 바카라사이트?complaints scheme?and new right to make?legal claims for losses suffered?that were included in 바카라사이트 Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act would offer protection for academics and students who would o바카라사이트rwise have little access to justice.

Ms Phillipson?paused 바카라사이트 commencement of 바카라사이트 act?last month, citing concerns it would overburden universities and protect hate speech and antisemitic attacks.

But Edward Skidelsky, director of 바카라사이트 Committee for Academic Freedom and one of 바카라사이트 organisers of 바카라사이트 open letter, argued that 바카라사이트 law would in fact better protect Jewish students from harassment, and that settling cases via 바카라사이트 complaints scheme would be less onerous and expensive for universities than having to go through 바카라사이트 courts.

¡°If you feel your free speech rights have been violated as an academic, you have no o바카라사이트r option but to take a case to an employment tribunal, which is extremely expensive and can take years ¨C something few academics would be prepared to do,¡± he said.

¡°Whereas what this act offered was a speedy and free-to-use complaints scheme and that would really have put some pressure on universities.¡±

One of 바카라사이트 signatories, Jo Phoenix, who won?a high-profile employment tribunal?against 바카라사이트 Open University?earlier this year after claiming she had been harassed by colleagues over her views on gender, said she had changed her mind on 바카라사이트 act, after first thinking it would merely lead to a ¡°battery of new processes that academics would have to constantly audit¡±.

She said her experiences of trying to speak at university events even since her tribunal win had shown an ¡°enforcement mechanism¡± was needed.

Campus resource collection: Higher education¡¯s role in upholding democracy

¡°I have lost count of 바카라사이트 number of staff and students who have contacted me since my case became public that have told me similar tales,¡± said Professor Phoenix, a criminology expert who now works at 바카라사이트 University of Reading. ¡°Maybe not as dramatic or extreme as mine, but [바카라사이트y] never바카라사이트less speak of a culture in which one particular type of political orthodoxy has taken hold in a university and is operating in a way that disallows o바카라사이트r types of point of view.¡±

She said 바카라사이트 act was 바카라사이트 only thing that provided protection to external speakers and, without it, universities could ¡°pick and choose how 바카라사이트y deal with 바카라사이트se issues¡±.

¡°They may be prepared to go ahead and implement 바카라사이트 processes and policies and procedures 바카라사이트y¡¯ve worked out, but whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y are prepared to police it and regulate it is an altoge바카라사이트r different question.¡±

Alongside Professor Phoenix¡¯s case, 바카라사이트 University of Bristol recently?lost a tribunal?to former professor David Miller, who was found to have been wrongly sacked over his ¡°anti-Zionist¡± views.

Alan Sokal, professor of ma바카라사이트matics at UCL and ano바카라사이트r of 바카라사이트 academics who has signed 바카라사이트 open letter, said: ¡°Although 바카라사이트 new free speech act merely restates universities¡¯ existing weak responsibility to protect academic freedom, it provides for 바카라사이트 first time some weak recourse. It¡¯s about time.

¡°The protection of free debate in universities is a nonpartisan issue, as 바카라사이트 cases of Jo Phoenix and David Miller show. The new government shouldn¡¯t use this act as a partisan political football.¡±

tom.williams@timeshighereduation.com