41 Fall 2021 to test received wisdom and to express controversial views without being fired; the right of universities to be free to appoint staff and admit students; and the right to decide what to teach students and what research to undertake. Academic freedom does not equate to absolute free speech, as many academics believe. Unlawful antisemitic expression, such as speech that can potentially lead to violence, cannot be defended on the grounds of academic freedom. On the other hand, academic freedom does protect speech that is merely offensive, and such speech would be unlikely to be considered “harassment” under the Equality Act 2010. This is why the inability of university administrators and academics to distinguish between hate speech and offensive speech is so problematic. In addition, although offensive remarks made in a lecture are unlikely to be caught by the “harassment” provision of the Equality Act due to the principle of academic freedom, academic freedom does not justify conduct that violates the rights of others, such as the right of university students to be treated with dignity and respect by the academic staff. Accordingly, most universities have “Acceptable Behaviour at Work”policies, whose overriding aim is to promote an inclusive learning environment where diversity is valued, and educational opportunities are open to all students regardless of race, ethnicity, and religion. These university policies place further limitations on free speech on campus. Student Unions and Student Societies Student unions and societies acquired charitable status in 2010 and became governed by charity law. This law requires them to act within their charitable objectives, as set out in their constitutional document. As educational charities, the charitable objectives of student unions and their societies are normally to advance the educational experience of their student members. As such, they are not permitted to engage in activities or incur expenditures which are not intended to advance the educational experience of their members. It is only permissible for students’ unions and societies to engage in political activity that supports the society’s charitable objectives, and it must be done in a balanced and non-discriminatory way. For example, a stated charitable objective of a student Palestine society might be“to raise political awareness,”but this would need to be done by debating political issues in a balanced and non-discriminatory manner that is educational. At my own university, Sheffield Hallam University, the newly formed Palestine society’s stated charitable objective of “Palestinian solidarity” was rejected by the students’ union as breaching charity law because it lacked an educational purpose. Generally, while it is lawful for students’ unions and societies to hold events of an educational nature that criticize Israel legitimately, it is not lawful for them to hold events that vilify Israel, causing emotional harm to, and impairing the educational opportunity of, Jewish students. What Can Be Done to Reduce Campus Antisemitism The students’ union is an autonomous organization that is separate from the university. It is a registered charity governed by its own board of trustees. However, under Part II of the Education Act 1994, the governing body of the university is required to ensure that its students’ union operates in a fair and democratic manner and is also accountable for its finances. Specifically, under section 22 of the Education Act 1994, each university has a legal obligation to monitor its students’ union’s expenditure for compliance with charity law and the university can withhold funding where there is a breach. Similarly, the students’ union can withhold funding to its student societies when they are in breach of charity law. Complaints about students’ unions can be made to the university under section 22 (2) Education Act 1994. Many universities, students’ unions, and student societies still do not comply with the legislation to prevent campus antisemitism. The frequent refrain of many universities in response to complaints concerning antisemitism is that their students’ union is entirely separate, and that they have no power to control its activities. In fact, however, they do have power, as they can withhold its funding. Free Speech on Campus and the Equality Act 2010 Under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, universities are responsible for ensuring that students, faculty, and staff are protected from discrimination, harassment, and victimization, and are obliged to foster good relations between students of different ethnic and religious groups, including by tackling prejudice and promoting understanding. This is called the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), and it applies to Jewish students who are protected as a“religious”and a“racial”group under the law. In exercising its function of providing an educational environment, each university must seek to ensure that minority students, including Jewish students, can realize their full educational potential without fear, threat, or
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=