January 2012
One of the biggest threats to free speech in
Canada comes from universities that condone illegal activities on the part of
people who obstruct, interrupt and effectively shut down the events and speeches
of people they disagree with.
University of B.C. president Stephen Toope has
lamented that “in Canada, we have seen many examples of students trying to shut
down speakers with whom they disagree.”
Toope has asserted that, “the role of the
university is to encourage tough questioning, and clear expressions of
disagreement, but not the silencing of alternative views. Universities are sites
for the contestation of values, not places where everyone has to agree. That
means that speakers we don’t like, or even respect, should be allowed to put
forward their views . . . (which can) then be challenged and argued over.”
Section 430 of the Criminal Code makes it an
offence to “obstruct, interrupt or interfere with any person in the lawful use,
enjoyment or operation of property.”
But universities in Ottawa, Montreal, Waterloo,
Calgary and elsewhere have turned a blind eye to people physically obstructing
and disrupting speech they disagree with. Ann Coulter, the
controversial American pundit and author, was scheduled to speak at the
University of Ottawa in March 2010 as part of her tour of Canadian universities,
sponsored by the International Free Press Society. Before arriving, Coulter
received a threatening letter from University of Ottawa academic vice-president
Francois Houle, warning her: “Weigh your words” or risk criminal or civil legal
consequences.
Coulter’s speech ended up being cancelled due to
the university failing to provide adequate security in the face of
violence-threatening protesters.
In November 2010, Christie Blatchford was to
speak at the University of Waterloo about her book Helpless: Caledonia’s
Nightmare of Fear and Anarchy, and How the Law Failed All of Us. Blatchford
criticized Ontario’s McGuinty government for failing to treat all citizens
equally.
Three students sat on the stage, loudly chanting
things like “no free speech for Nazi apologizers!” and refused to leave. One of
these disrupting obstructionists explained, “We don’t want people who are
really, really racist teaching . . . (and) we don’t want that person to have a
public forum because it makes it dangerous for others in the public forum. Our
goal was to not let her speak. We accomplished that.”
Michael Strickland, the University of Waterloo’s
assistant director of media relations, stated, “We made a determination that
since she wasn’t going to get a word in, in any sort of respectful fashion,
there would be no point in bringing her out and havingher subjected
to that.”
Apparently, arresting and removing the
obstructionists was not on the university’s radar screen.
At McGill University in 2009, the speaker giving
a controversial talk called Echoes of the Holocaust, organized by the campus
Choose Life club, was shouted down by protesters. Campus security did not remove
the protesters, who effectively censored the event by shutting it down, much
like the protesters who shut down the Blatchford and Coulter events. Some
pro-choice attendees approached the speaker afterward to express their regret at
not being able to hear his arguments.
At the University of Calgary, pro-life students
have set up a controversial display on campus 12 times since 2006, for two
consecutive days each time. In the fall of 2007, campus security stood by and
watched while obstructionists blocked and disrupted the display, and prevented
the pro-life students from carrying on dialogue with other students. Campus
security did not ask the obstructionists to cease their conduct. Instead, after
this incident, the university started demanding that the pro-life students turn
their signs inward. When the students refused to comply with this demand, the
university found them guilty of non-academic misconduct, a verdict the students
are now seeking to overturn in court.
The universities’ failure to uphold the rule of
law sends a very clear message in support of mob rule: If you disagree with
someone, then silence that person and prevent that person from expressing her or
his views. Whether universities themselves restrict controversial or politically
incorrect speech, or whether they fail to uphold the rule of law on campus, in
both cases, the end result is censorship.
Calgary lawyer John Carpay is president of the
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. www.jccf.ca
Calgary Herald, November 14, 2011.
Help us maintain freedom in teaching, research and scholarship by joining SAFS or making a donation.
