  
Statement by President of the Association of Academic Staff, University of Alberta
Dear Members,
It has been in the news lately that Dougal MacDonald, an assistant lecturer at the U. of A, made remarks on his private Facebook page, which have come under scrutiny. Dougal MacDonald's remarks were his own and not linked to his U. of A. professional activities. The University's Deputy Provost Wendy Rodgers said in an email statement:
"As a private citizen, Mr. MacDonald has the right to express
his opinion, and others have the right to critique or debate that opinion," she said. "It is our understanding that he has not expressed these views in the context of his employment
relationship with the university."
Indeed, as a private citizen Dougal MacDonald has freedom of
expression, which is protected in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Freedom of expression also protects the right, as indicated above, to critique or debate that opinion by a private citizen such as Dougal MacDonald, which the University Student Union has done. However, the Student Union has also called for Dougal MacDonald to take back his statements or resign. The call by the SU for him to take back his statements can be seen as pressure for retroactive self-censorship. This is inconsistent with principles of freedom of expression. The SU-proposed
alternative to retraction of his statements, resignation, is not appropriate either, as it is regarding statements made by Dougal MacDonald in the capacity of a private citizen.
Kevin Kane
Petition from Faculty Members, University of Alberta
Akanksha Bhatnagar
President, University of Alberta Students’ Union
[...]
Dear Akanksha,
We are very concerned about the statement issued by the
Students' Union at the University of Alberta in regard to Dr. Dougal MacDonald, who teaches in the Faculty of Education.
Your condemnation of Dr. MacDonald's remarks on the Holodomor
and demand that he take them back or resign are incompatible with the University's policies and principles on Freedom of
Expression. Just this week the General Faculties Council approved the University's new statement on Freedom of Expression which reads:
"The university is a place of free and open inquiry in all
matters, and all members of the university community have the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, view,
challenge, profess, and learn. Members of the university
community have the right to criticize and question other views expressed on our campuses, but may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with others' freedom of expression. Debate or
deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forward are thought by some, or even most, to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or misguided. It is for individuals, not the
institution, to make those judgments for themselves and to act not by seeking to suppress expression, but by openly and
vigorously contesting the ideas they oppose. The university does not attempt to shield members of the university community from ideas or opinions they disagree with or find offensive."
Dr. MacDonald's remarks are protected by our Charter of
Rights and Freedoms as well as by the academic freedom to extramural expression that is a necessary right of all academic staff at the University. As the statement notes, in the
University the proper response to ideas with which we do not agree is rigorous debate with those ideas, not their
suppression.
The learning environment is not, as your statement implies,
made "safe" when any individual or group attempts to prevent another's exercise of freedom of expression. It is fundamentally undermined, as the ability to examine, analyze, and critique all ideas is the lifeblood of the University.
For list of signatories, click here.
Open Letter from Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship
to President of University
Dear President Turpin,
I am writing as president of the Society for Academic Freedom
and Scholarship (SAFS), an organization of university faculty members and others dedicated to the defence of academic freedom and the merit principle in higher education. (For further
information, please see our website at www.safs.ca.)
Faculty of Education instructor Dougal MacDonald was
criticized strongly by members of the University of Alberta community (and others) for remarks he made in November regarding the Holodomor. Some have suggested that the U of A reprimand or fire Mr MacDonald. The Society for Academic Freedom and
Scholarship commends the University of Alberta for much in its response to complaints it has received. For one, the U of A has rejected demands to sanction Mr MacDonald. For another, the U of A plans to bring scholars together in the near future to discuss the Holodomor publicly.
Nonetheless, two elements in the U of A's response to
complaints appear inconsistent with the university's stated commitment to academic freedom and freedom of expression on campus.
The first is the insistence by the university that Mr
MacDonald spoke about the Holodomor as a private citizen, not as an academic. Wendy Rodgers, Vice Provost of the University of Alberta, for instance, speaking on behalf of the university, has been quoted as saying, "It is our understanding that he has not expressed these views in the context of his employment
relationship with the university."
Because he is an academic, Mr MacDonald possesses freedom of
extramural utterance. The U of A is not simply respecting his freedom of expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights
and
Freedoms. The university has an obligation apart from the Charter, simply as an academic institution, to protect and foster extramural utterance.
As well, in her remark, Dr Rodgers is suggesting that had Mr
MacDonald said what he said about the Holodomor as a U of A academic, in teaching, research, or service, it would have been both appropriate and within the university's rights for the U of A to reprimand or sanction him. Mr MacDonald enjoys academic freedom, and an important aspect of academic freedom is freedom of discussion in all academic contexts. The content of Mr
MacDonald's views could not be used as grounds to discipline him were he to express those views in an academic context rather than on Facebook or elsewhere.
The second is the university's desire to enter the discussion
of the Holodomor and to announce an official university position on an historical event. This comes out clearly in the joint statement by the deans of Arts and Education. The deans write that they "state categorically that this [that the Holodomor is 'a myth concocted by the Hitlerite Nazis to discredit the Soviet Union'] is not true." That desire is also present in your own statement, written with three others, "Raising Awareness of the Holodomor": "his views do not represent and are not endorsed by the University of Alberta."
This desire is contrary to the statement on Freedom of
Expression recently approved by the U of A General Faculties Council:
"It is for individuals, not the institution, to make those
judgments for themselves and to act not by seeking to suppress expression, but by openly and vigorously contesting the ideas they oppose."
The principle that universities themselves take no stance on
substantive matters is a wise and important principle. It ensures that academics do not suffer the pressure of having to conform to a party line. In doing so, it preserves the trust the public has in research emanating from the university.
We respectfully request that you respond to our letter. With
your permission, we will post your response along with this letter on our website.
Sincerely,
Mark Mercer, PhD
President, Society for Academic Freedom
and Scholarship (SAFS)
(TML Weeky, December 14, 2019 - No. 31)
Return to Index on Ukraine
(To access articles
individually click on
the black headline.)
PDF
Website:
www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|