Eight universities and 13 student unions received at least one F in the 2019 Campus Freedom Index.
Released by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, the Campus Freedom Index awards 240 grades and measures violations of free speech at 60 university campuses every year.
Each campus is graded on four things: university policies, university practices, student union policies and student union practices.
The grades of institutions and unions were negatively affected when their policies restrict offensive or discriminatory speech.
Of the 60 campuses, only four received an A rating for their policies: Bishop’s University McMaster University, Simon Fraser University, and the University of Lethbridge.
No university earned an ‘A’ grade for its practices in the 2019 Campus Freedom Index, even though all that is required for a university to earn an ‘A’ grade is to defend free expression publicly and vigorously in the face of pressure to censor speech on campus.
The universities that received an F rating include Acadia University, Memorial University, Ryerson University, University of Alberta, University of British Columbia, University of Calgary, University of Manitoba, University of Winnipeg, and Wilfrid Laurier University.
“These universities do not understand and do not actually believe in real academic freedom or free speech,” James Kitchen, a staff lawyer at the JCCF who regularly deals with campus free speech, said. “There’s a lot of facts that get conveniently hidden when you shut down academic freedom and free speech.”
The university student unions that received F ratings include Brandon University, British Columbia Institute of Technology Students’ Association, Dalhousie Student Union and Lakehead University.
The Thompson Rivers University Students’ Union (TRUSU) is the only student union to earn an ‘A’ grade in the policies category. No student union earned an A in its practices.
The University of Alberta Students’ Union which has received Fs in policy for the past three years was punished in the Index because of its poster policy, which states that posters with “sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise defamatory” content will not be approved because it goes against free speech.
Joel Agarwal, the vice-president (academic) at the union, said he wasn’t surprised by the rating.
“At the end of the day, these ratings are quite subjective in their approach,” he said. “We recognize that students come to the university to learn and be challenged, but we also recognize that this must be done in a thoughtful, respectful and compassionate manner.”
“The students’ union hasn’t received any formal complaints regarding the infringement of free speech,” Agarwal added. “I think that reports from external interest groups don’t really direct the policy direction of the Students’ Union.”
“Diversity or equality or tolerance—none of these things are bad per se on their own,” said Kitchen. “But they get used to shut down speech that the proponents of these things don’t like.”
Wilfrid Laurier University was also one of the universities that received an F for its practices. In 2017, the university came under fire for its handling of a teaching assistant who played a video of a debate on the legality of adding “gender identity or expression” to the Canadian Human Rights Act.
“Free speech is a double-edged sword,” said Tobias Gallas, a first-year student at Wilfrid Laurier, referring to the balancing act between free speech and the sharing of offensive ideas. “Where do they draw the fine line?”
Gabriel Wooltorton, also a first-year student at Wilfrid Laurier, added that free speech is important “so people don’t get trapped in any sort of echo chamber.”
Carleton University received a C in both categories, a slight improvement from 2018, when it received a D for university policies.
The Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA) also received Cs. One of the reasons for this was not granting Carleton Lifeline—a pro-life abortion advocacy group—official club status in 2013. The club has since been accepted and has held several on-campus events.
The JCCF believes there must be some limitations on free speech—“the line should be drawn at hate speech as defined by the Criminal Code of Canada,” a policy paper from the Centre reads—but Kitchen believes restrictions should be few and far between.
“It’s really not that hard,” said Kitchen. “Just let people speak.”
Feature image from file.
