The Equality and Human Rights Commission has
collaborated with leading organisations from across the
sector to develop new guidance to
be used by all institutions and student unions,
demonstrating the sector’s commitment to upholding
freedom of expression.
This guidance is the first time that legal rights and
obligations around free speech have been defined so
coherently, empowering institutions, student unions and
individuals to stand up for free speech and creating a
structure for them to work together. It clarifies the
limited occasions where free speech can lawfully be
limited, allowing it to flourish for current and future
generations of students.
Sector leaders agreed to create new guidance during a
Department for Education free speech summit in May
2018, which has been produced by the Equality and Human
Rights Commission, with input from the National Union
of Students, Universities UK, Charity Commission for
England and Wales, Office for Students, Independent HE,
Guild HE, Commission for Countering Extremism and Home
Office.
Universities Minister said:
Free speech is a value integral to the independence
and innovation that embodies the higher education
sector in the UK, fuelling academic thought and
challenging injustice. This guidance is a symbol of
the commitment from across the sector to protecting
freedom of speech.
The guidance provides a clear framework for
institutions and student unions to work within, and
provides additional clarity on the contentious issue
of hate speech. It also sets out a clear benchmark of
good practice around how these organisations can work
together to facilitate and uphold free speech,
alongside other requirements such as the Prevent
Duty, which requires higher education institutions to
safeguard staff and students from being drawn into
terrorism.
I want to thank the EHRC and all the contributing
organisations for their collaboration to make this
vital feat possible.
David Isaac, Chair of the Equality and Human Rights
Commission, said:
The free expression and exchange of different views
without persecution or interference goes straight to
the heart of our democracy and is a vital part of
higher education. Holding open, challenging debates
rather than silencing the views of those we don’t
agree with helps to build tolerance and address
prejudice and discrimination. Our guidance makes
clear that freedom of speech in higher education
should be upheld at every opportunity and should only
be limited where there are genuine safety concerns or
it constitutes unlawful behaviour.
Sir Michael Barber, Chair of the Office for Students,
said:
I welcome this important and timely guidance. Freedom
of speech is one of our most cherished values, and
our higher education system should be at the
forefront of its promotion and protection. A key part
of a quality higher education experience should be
that students confront and debate opinions and ways
of thinking which may be different to their own. This
guidance ensures that universities and student unions
are clear on their responsibilities, allowing them to
ensure that our higher education system remains a
place where passionate but civil debate thrives.
Alistair Jarvis, Chief Executive at Universities UK,
said:
Universities are absolutely committed to promoting
and protecting free speech. Universities host
thousands of events each year – among a student
population of more than two million – and the vast
majority of these pass without incident.
Although there is little evidence of a systematic
problem of free speech in universities, there is a
legal duty on the higher education sector to secure
free speech within the law and it is important that
universities continually review their approaches.
This new guidance provides a useful tool that will
help universities balance the numerous requirements
placed upon them, including student safeguarding
responsibilities, and supports their significant
efforts to uphold freedom of speech.
NUS Vice President Higher Education, Amatey Doku said:
The Joint Committee on Human Rights in Parliament
found that there was no widespread problem with
freedom of expression at universities, and issues
such as regulatory complexity or bureaucracy and
reported self-censorship arising from the Prevent
Duty were as much of a concern as the small minority
of cases repeatedly cited in the media.
Students’ unions are required to ensure freedom of
expression is upheld within the law: they are adept
at doing so and support many thousands of events each
year. However, as the guidance rightly notes, the
right to freedom of expression is not absolute and
that students’ unions and universities must balance
that right with other legal duties. We were pleased
to input into the drafting process in order to help
identify where confusion can arise and to dispel some
of the common myths around students’ union activity.
We hope that this guidance is read not only by
universities and students’ unions but by anyone
looking to understand or comment on freedom of
expression in higher education - so that the future
debate is informed and balanced, and ceases to be
characterised by both misconception and exaggeration.
Dr David Llewellyn, Chair of GuildHE and Vice
Chancellor, Harper Adams University said:
Higher education institutions are champions of free
speech, places where ideas and views - even those
that some might find offensive - can be rigorously
discussed and challenged. Our staff, and others
contributing to our educational and research
activities, must be able to freely consider
contentious issues.
We also have to be able to work with students to
develop their ability to critically analyse what is
being said, weigh up different arguments and
contribute to the debate. That is why we welcome this
new guidance, which will provide greater clarity on
the rights and obligations for freedom of expression,
particularly in areas such as the balance between our
commitment to free speech and legislation to prevent
radicalisation.
Alex Proudfoot, Chief Executive of IHE said:
Free speech is an essential ingredient of our sector
and our civil society, but the average independent
university bears little resemblance to the hyped-up
image of higher education as a battleground for
identity politics. Our members are too focused on
providing a professional learning environment which
support students from different backgrounds make the
most of their abilities, and have yet to see any
issues with freedom of expression.
This is a complex area of law for our members. While
all institutions who register with the Office for
Students have a duty to protect freedom of speech,
those without public grant funding are subject to a
different legislative framework, and they will
welcome this comprehensive and accessible how-to
guide on managing their legal responsibilities.
This timely guidance should help independent
universities and colleges to navigate the existing
bureaucracy, balancing any perceived risks to freedom
of expression with their responsibilities under
Prevent. At a time when the burden of regulation is
rising, it is all the more important that any rules
in this area be rigorously tested to ensure
proportionality to the small and low-risk
institutions in our membership.
Security Minister, , said:
Free speech is vitally important to our democracy,
and universities and students unions should continue
to be an environment where people can discuss and
share different viewpoints. “The Prevent duty is part
and parcel of the wider safeguarding obligations all
of us have towards people particularly vulnerable to
grooming.
We welcome this document, which will support the
higher education sector to think about the various
issues they need to consider as they work to promote
free speech.
Helen Stephenson CBE, Chief Executive of the Charity
Commission for England and Wales, said:
Registered charities, particularly those with
educational purposes such as students’ unions, can
play a vital role in providing space for discussion
and debate. We are pleased that this guidance will
support trustees in their decision-making, making it
easier for trustees to understand how they can ensure
emotive subjects can be discussed and debated in an
open, accessible environment.
We hope this guidance will help trustees make good,
balanced decisions in order to bolster the positive
impact their charities have on society.
