Alberta must ensure free speech is protected

Universities should celebrate freedom of expression, Lindsay Shepherd says

“It is not the proper role of the university to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive.”

So reads a passage from the Chicago principles, developed by the University of Chicago in 2014. The document has been hailed as the gold standard by which American universities can uphold free expression and academic freedom on campus.

Alberta’s United Conservative Party government announced earlier this month it will be requiring Alberta universities to abide by the Chicago principles. This move would follow in the footsteps of Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative government in Ontario.

This is a welcome development, as we often still hear about the stifling of free expression and open inquiry on university campuses across the country.

In March of this year, ex-Muslim activist Armin Navabi was set to give a speech at Calgary’s Mount Royal University on the topic of atheism versus reforming Islam. Navabi was disinvited by the university’s interfaith centre days before his presentation. University officials cited heightened sensitivities following the Christchurch mosque shootings as the reason for his disinvitation. Fortunately, due to pressure from members of the university and community at large who wanted to hear Navabi’s point of view, MRU reversed course and expressed regret over the disinvitation.

Mount Royal’s exercise in humility is not definitive of the situation at most universities. Most cases do not have happy endings.

Back in 2016, the student club U-Alberta Pro-Life was less than two weeks away from hosting an educational display on campus when the University of Alberta informed them that they would have to pay a whopping $17,500 in security fees to host the pro-life display. That’s more than triple the average tuition of a year of study at the University of Alberta! The club is seeking a declaration that the decision made by the University of Alberta to impose a $17,500 security fee on the club infringed their Charter right to freedom of expression.

Five-figure security fees are a form of censorship. Security fees should not be imposed on members of the university community as a condition for exercising their right to assemble and peacefully express themselves.

The reason U-Alberta ProLife was quoted $17,500 was to subsidize the costs of those who wanted to disrupt and obstruct their display. But the security burden, should one ever be necessary, should be placed on the disrupting parties. Freedom of expression does not include the right to disrupt, obstruct, interrupt or interfere with the right of others to express their opinions. Thus, common disrupter strategies such as activating fire alarms to shut down an event, banging on walls and doors, blowing horns and banging on drums, and shouting to drown out the voice of a speaker, to name but a few, should not be permitted.

Given that public universities are generously supported by public operational funding, governments have a duty to see that these institutions upkeep their mandates to protect and promote intellectual inquiry, free expression and open debate.

Universities are meant to, in part, prepare young Canadians for participation in our free society. It is therefore nonsensical that students and other members of the university would have restrictions on their speech while on campus that would be rightly deemed protected expression in wider society. Fortunately for our public universities, the Criminal Code has already defined what constitutes free speech and what crosses the line. Universities need not (and should not) reinvent the wheel.

And, fortunately for Alberta legislators, the Justice Centre has already provided a thorough model by which they can honour the government’s pledge to enforce the Chicago principles on campus. This model legislation gives students strong legal tools to assert their rights in the courts when government actors change and the current enthusiasm for campus free speech wanes.

There should be no greater celebration of freedom of expression in this province than at its public colleges and universities.