Members of Carleton University’s Senate questioned university president Wisdom Tettey over the proposed Institutional Impartiality Policy, raising concerns about academic freedom, university governance and free expression.
The proposed policy, which is still under consideration and subject to approval by the Board of Governors, would prohibit academic or administrative departments from making statements on political issues and prohibit staff from making statements that could be interpreted as being on behalf of the university.
The university has a “resolute commitment” to both its core values and maintaining impartiality “on specific matters about which individuals and groups may engage in free inquiry,” according to the policy’s draft.
CUASA (the union representing faculty and professional librarians) and student groups have voiced concerns about the policy and asked the university to withdraw the proposal.
At an Oct. 31 Senate meeting, Tettey opened the discussion by calling for accuracy in how university policies are represented in public discourse.
“We all have an obligation to our institution to make sure that we’re not putting it in a position where its reputation is unduly maligned,” he said.
He added that “untruths” surrounding the policy have already caused harm.
“I don’t think any one of us wants to put our institution in risk for things that are not based on fact,” Tettey said. “When we do that as well, we also put our colleagues in danger, because people act on some of these untruths.”
A key concern raised by several senators was how the policy could limit departmental autonomy.
“The policy is taking away a right and autonomy that we do have as faculty members,” said senator Azar Masoumi. “The logic is that you’re taking away this right to give us more rights, which I think is a flawed logic.”
Senator Rania Tfaily also asked if a statement previously made by the Institute of European, Russian and Eurasian Studies regarding the invasion of Ukraine would be considered unacceptable under the new policy.
“Yes, it will be considered unacceptable,” Tettey responded. “But if members of that unit decide to speak in their capacity as members of the unit and not necessarily speaking for … the institute, that is fine.”
If political contexts change, Tfaily said, discussions on any topic could be considered partisan.
“Everything could become partisan,” she said. “This is a slippery slope and dangerous.”
Tettey said policies can be reviewed, and that the university will “cross that bridge if we get there.”
“I have no sense that this university is walking away from its commitment to inclusion,” Tettey said.
Student senator Nir Hagigi said the policy makes Carleton “the most repressive campus in Canada,” adding that other Canadian universities have not adopted similar policies.
“I don’t see it that way,” Tettey replied, adding that other universities not having similar policies shouldn’t prevent Carleton from having one.
Senators also asked how the university will decide which statements are acceptable under the new rules.
Tettey said decisions will be guided by existing university policies, like Carleton’s Human Rights Policy, and by the “umbrella set of values that we all have committed to.”
When asked about how the policy will be enforced, Tettey said that issue would be addressed in the next version of the policy.
“If [there’s] a violation … it will be addressed in the next iteration of the policy.”
Featured graphic by Sara Mizannojehdehi/the Charlatan.
