There has been a lot of controversy concerning freedom of speech at Australian universities. Late last year, the Australian government asked a former Chief justice of the high court, Robert French, to make a review on the state of freedom of speech on campuses in Australia. The study was to be embarked upon within four months, as the former Chief justice of the high court was given the task of assessing the framework guarding freedom of inquiry and expression. Together with the several conventions and business agreements that regulate Australian university campuses. He was also asked to suggest policy decisions that could help advance or encourage freedom of expression. Also, with the creation of a division-led code of conduct to regulate campus behaviour.
“A Series of Controversies”
The government’s request was hastened after a series of controversies on many campuses where members of college communities were criticised for suppressing political debates. However, university authorities in Australia have queried why the review is essential, showcasing their views that university campuses in Australia should be free of political meddling. It as well condemned some media analysts for being very erroneous and selective in quoting from university canons and policies to drive their assertions about freedom of speech.
Two Sides to the Story
The education minister Dan Tehan said universities were key institutions where notions were argued and queried, and protection for freedom of speech had to be upheld. “The best university education is one where students are taught to reason for themselves, and preserving free speech or freedom of speech is how to assure that,” he stated. If required, the review carried out by French could develop into the creation of an Australian sort of the Chicago statement. The statement is a voluntary scheme that plainly states or describes a university’s dedication to promoting freedom of speech.
However, French also stated that he would regard the legal, institutional Independence of Australia’s university institutions while handling the review. The former Chief justice of the high court also said that an essential point of the review would be the creation of a resource. He stated that the resource would include a model code which can be utilised as a benchmark in any concern by universities of their current guidelines and rules concerning the preservation of free speech on campus. But Universities Australia said that university institutions in the country had over 100 agreements, policies, and canons. All these frameworks back free intellectual inquiry, guaranteeing a habit of vibrant, enthusiastic debate and a lively contest of ideas. The chair of Universities Australia Prof. Margaret Gardner said some remarks in media reporting had de-emphasised the healthy state of discussion on campuses and mischaracterised academic freedom. She also said some analysts on freedom of speech at Australian universities have been very incorrect- making wrong conclusions or choosing selective quotes from university codes and guidelines.
These same opinions would not meet the starting point test of academic investigation- informed by facts and evidence. They are formulated by proponents who seem to want the government to suppress university independence or autonomy with rigid external guidelines and formalities. Despite these erroneous claims, an extensive range of views are freely expressed on campus- in the framework of university canons and Australian law. Also, worth mentioning is that the office of the education minister stated that Universities Australia was also called upon on the review.