Return to Issues/Cases Page
SAFS Response to Provost Vivek Goel
National Post
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Re: Free Speech In Name Only, David Frum, Feb. 10.
As Mr. Frum points out, it is not clear that Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides enough protection for free speech. Unfortunately for free speech, the Charter is not the only one dropping the ball; universities are doing so as well. As part of their mission, universities have a special responsibility to be guardians of free speech. However, earlier this month, Vivek Goel, the vice president and provost of the University of Toronto, wrote: "[S]ome forms of expression fall short of the legal limits of hate speech, but nonetheless are harmful to identifiable members of our community. The university recognizes that harmful speech is a destructive force on our campuses and, though not prohibited by law, is repugnant to the administration." He goes on to say that harmful speech will be "monitored closely."
These assertions are deeply troubling. In going beyond the usual legal restrictions on defamation of character and incitement of violence, they introduce the nebulous and highly subjective notion of "harmful speech." By what standards will such a notion be judged -- Orwellian? Worse still, Provost Goel proposes using campus police to identify allegedly likely candidates for harmful speech.
Is the trend now moving against the protection of free speech? If neither the Charter nor one of Canada's leading universities is a vigorous protector of free speech, do Canadians have, in fact, free speech?
Phil Sullivan, professor emeritus, University of Toronto;
Clive Seligman, president, Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship, London, Ont.
Original letter that was sent to the editor:
February 12, 2007
Letter to Editor:
As David Frum pointed out (Free Speech in Name Only, Feb. 10, NP) it is not clear that Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides enough protection for free speech. As a specific example, he noted that the Alberta Human Rights Commission is investigating the Western Standard for publishing the Danish Mohammad cartoons.
Unfortunately for free speech, the Charter is not the only one dropping the ball. Universities are doing so as well. As part of their mission, universities have a special responsibility to be guardians of free speech. However, earlier this month, Vivek Goel, the Vice-President and Provost of Canada’s premier university, the University of Toronto, wrote:
“[S]ome forms of
expression fall short of the legal limits of hate speech, but nonetheless are
harmful to identifiable members of our community. The university recognizes that
harmful speech is a destructive force on our campuses and, though not prohibited
by law, is repugnant to the administration." He goes on to say that harmful
speech will be “monitored closely.”
These assertions are deeply troubling. In going beyond the usual legal
restrictions on defamation of character and incitement of violence, they
introduce the nebulous and highly subjective notion of “harmful speech.” By what
standards will such a notion be judged -- Orwellian? Worse still, Provost Goel
proposes using campus police to identify allegedly likely candidates for harmful
speech.
Provost Goel’s statement is sadly not a policy aberration, but consistent with President Naylor’s statement last March regarding flyers on campus that depicted one of the Mohammad cartoons, and his administration’s order to the campus police to remove them and forward them to the Toronto police.
Contrast the
current situation with U of T’s admirable defence of free speech just prior to the
Danish cartoon episode. For example, a memorandum circulated in 2005 states:
"Freedom of speech, academic freedom, and freedom of research are meaningless
unless they entail the right to raise deeply disturbing questions, and
provocative challenges to cherished beliefs."
Is the trend now moving against the protection of free speech? If neither the Charter nor one of Canada’s leading universities is a vigorous protector of free speech, we wonder to what extent Canadians do, in fact, have the right to free speech.
Sincerely,
Phil Sullivan, professor emeritus
University of Toronto
Clive Seligman, president
Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship
London, Ontario