Latest news with #FreedomofSpeech)Act2023
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
UK regulator tells Universities: Defend free speech, even if it's uncomfortable
British universities are facing a reckoning over the boundaries of speech and academic freedom. In newly issued guidance, the Office for Students, the UK's higher education regulator, has warned institutions that shielding students from legal but controversial ideas poses a threat to core academic principles. The message is unambiguous: Students must not only be allowed to speak freely, but also be prepared to confront opinions that may challenge, disturb, or even offend them. 'This includes things that they may find uncomfortable or shocking,' said Arif Ahmed, director for freedom of speech at the Office for Students. 'By being exposed to a diversity of academic thought, students will develop their analytical and critical thinking skills. ' A nation at a crossroads The guidance, released Thursday, arrives at a time when concerns are mounting that the UK's higher education system has leaned too far into ideological gatekeeping. Multiple groups, including gender-critical academics and pro-Israel organizations, have accused universities of suppressing lawful expression in deference to student protest. The backlash has grown particularly intense in recent years. In 2021, Professor Kathleen Stock resigned from the University of Sussex following an aggressive campaign by student activists who condemned her views on biological sex. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like We cannot lose another baby to the same disease, help us! Donate For Health Donate Now Undo Stock, who argued that sex is binary and immutable, faced calls for dismissal from groups identifying as queer, trans, and nonbinary. In a rare move earlier this year, the Office for Students fined the university £585,000 for failing to protect freedom of speech. Legislation meets the lecture hall The new guidance aims to operationalize the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, passed under the previous government, to reinforce legal protections for speech on UK campuses. The Office for Students emphasized that while universities must uphold lawful expression, they are not required to tolerate unlawful speech, including content that violates public order, equality, or counter-terrorism laws. In practical terms, universities retain the right to control when, where, and how speech takes place, so long as they do not suppress its substance. This clause aims to balance expression with academic function, ensuring that debates don't disrupt teaching or research. No easy balance Still, the path forward is anything but straightforward. Legal experts caution that the implementation of these rights will remain fraught with complexity. Julian Sladdin, a partner at law firm Pinsent Masons, told The Guardian that challenges will persist. 'The difficulty which remains in practical terms is the fact that institutions are still subject to dealing day-to-day with extremely complex and often polarizing issues on campus and where the bounds of what may be lawful free speech are constantly being tested,' he was quoted as saying. This regulatory shift may be a necessary correction, but it is unlikely to end the battle between academic liberty and the emotional sensitivities of modern campus life. Beyond tolerance What emerges from this moment is a broader philosophical demand: that universities return to their core mission of cultivating rigorous, uncomfortable inquiry. In a climate where speech can be mistaken for violence and dissent for harm, the regulator's message is firm: Intellectual growth is not always safe, and it was never meant to be. British campuses are now tasked with navigating that reality, not retreating from it. Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
The Herald Scotland
16-05-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Freedom of Speech in Higher Education: Where does Scotland stand?
While some of the recent legislative and regulatory action has taken place in England, Scottish universities are not immune to the wider cultural, legal and sectoral shifts; indeed, the well-publicised NHS Fife changing room dispute and For Women Scotland's recent supreme court appeal show that Scotland is on the front-line of varying disputes in this space and its universities are far from immune from that. Scottish universities are proud of their history and commitment to freedom of speech, demonstrating a longstanding commitment to inclusivity and safe environments for expression of thought; however, seismic cultural shifts and legislative changes must make all Scottish universities pause for thought and consider whether their policies and procedures are fit for purpose in protecting the institution they treasure. Case in point: the recent high-profile case involving the University of Sussex — culminating in a £585,000 fine imposed by England's higher education regulator, the Office for Students (OfS) – has raised urgent questions for institutions across the UK. What obligations do universities have to protect academic freedom and free expression? Where should the line be drawn between inclusion and open debate? And what lessons, if any, should be applied in Scotland? A Distinctive Scottish Framework Scotland's higher education system operates under a distinct set of laws, governance structures and values. Scottish universities are accountable to the Scottish Funding Council, not the OfS, and the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, passed at Westminster, does not apply here. That said, Scottish universities are still subject to a range of legal duties that affect how they manage speech on campus: Human Rights Act 1998 and ECHR rights: Protect freedom of thought, conscience, and expression (Articles 9 and 10), subject to limits necessary in a democratic society. Equality Act 2010: A UK-wide statute that prohibits discrimination and harassment on grounds including religion or belief—including philosophical beliefs. Post-16 Education (Scotland) Act 2013: Reaffirms institutional autonomy and recognises the principle of academic freedom in Scotland. Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED): Requires public bodies to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations. These frameworks reflect Scotland's commitment to both inclusive education and robust intellectual enquiry. But as the Sussex case shows, striking the right balance in practice can be complex. The Sussex Decision: A Cautionary Tale? The OfS investigation into the University of Sussex focused on a Trans and Non-Binary Equality Policy introduced in 2018, and the extent to which it impacted staff and students' ability to express lawful but contested views, particularly those critical of prevailing gender orthodoxy. Four specific statements in the policy were found to have a 'chilling effect' on freedom of speech and academic freedom, leading to regulatory breaches. While the regulatory regime in Scotland is different, the substance of the issues will feel familiar to many here. Advance HE, the organisation whose template informed Sussex's policy, also works closely with Scottish institutions; many Scottish universities have adopted or adapted similar policies, often in pursuit of charter marks or DEI goals. It's therefore worth reflecting on what went wrong; this is not to mimic England's regulatory approach, but to safeguard the distinct values of Scottish higher education. (Image: Can universities truly maintain open debate in the current cultural climate?) Balancing Rights: The Scottish Way? In Scotland, there has long been a commitment to pluralism, respect for difference, and academic rigour. But even here, universities are facing increasing challenges in holding space for disagreement, particularly on issues such as gender identity, race, climate justice and international conflicts. Three principles emerge from the Sussex case that are relevant for Scottish institutions: 1. Freedom of speech and academic freedom must be given real and substantive protection. This means being cautious about policies or practices that could discourage staff or students from expressing legitimate, lawful views — even when those views are controversial or unpopular. 2. Legal boundaries matter. Universities cannot redefine what constitutes harassment or unlawful speech based on internal values or strategic priorities. Overreach – even in pursuit of inclusion – can carry legal risk and reputational damage. 3. Context, clarity and consultation are key. The Sussex policy was criticised not simply for its content but for how it was introduced. In Scotland, a transparent, inclusive process that encourages open dialogue may help pre-empt conflict. What This Means for Policy and Practice Scottish universities are not expected to walk away from their commitments to diversity, equality and inclusion. Nor should they. But they must ensure that DEI policies do not unintentionally undermine legally protected speech or create an environment where certain viewpoints are effectively excluded from academic life. This doesn't mean giving a platform to hate or harm. There remains a legal and moral obligation to prevent harassment and ensure safe learning environments. But lawful speech, no matter how uncomfortable, must be protected if academic freedom is to mean anything. Institutions may also wish to revisit how they manage controversial events, speaker invitations, and internal debates. While universities can impose proportionate time, place, and manner restrictions, any attempt to limit the content of lawful speech, directly or indirectly, should be approached with extreme caution. A Time for Reflection The OfS decision regarding Sussex is a product of the English regulatory context, but it offers a valuable opportunity for reflection here in Scotland. Are our policies appropriately balanced? Do they protect dissent as well as dignity? Do they foster open enquiry alongside inclusivity? These questions deserve serious attention—not because they are easy, but because they go to the heart of what a university is for. Scottish higher education has long been proud of its distinctive identity, rooted in Enlightenment values and intellectual independence. As debates around speech and academic freedom intensify, that identity may well become the sector's greatest asset, if we are brave enough to uphold it. Melanie Steed is a Principal Associate in the employment, pensions and immigration team of Weightmans This article was brought to you in partnership with Weightmans
