The term “free speech” is often thrown around in environments such as our campus, but it sometimes feels like many people don’t know what it really entails. To me, freedom of speech is the fundamental principle that every individual naturally possesses the right to express their ideas, opinions, and beliefs without fear of censorship or repercussions. “Speech” is a broad term itself, referring to literal speech, posting online, peaceful protest, wearing or displaying symbols, and other forms of everyday expression. In our new digital millennium, an age marked by rapid globalization and technological advancement, the protection of free speech has become increasingly paramount.

One particular free speech arena that has received a lot of attention is the humble college campus. Especially in the United States, there have been numerous post secondary institutions embroiled in controversy over their on-campus speech policies. Elite US universities are often the worst offenders; the American-based Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s free speech rankings show that Ivy League schools in particular score average at best, with Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania coming in dead last among all surveyed schools. Many US schools score very poorly on attributes including political diversity, comfort expressing ideas, and tolerance for speakers. 

Some of these same problems can be found on select Canadian university campuses, but in my time at the University of Toronto, I’ve actually been pleasantly surprised by the environment of free speech here. Part of it certainly stems from the enormous student population and the obvious diversity that comes with that, but free speech is also embodied as a core institutional value. I’ve seen all manner of events, student organizations, and speakers on campus, and the benefits of this speech-permissive environment are immeasurable. Diversity of thought and belief as well as frequent and rigorous debate on everything from the mundane to the extremely controversial is quite literally what drives academia and our world forward. To restrict an atmosphere of permissive speech is to directly halt human progress; something which I am glad UofT doesn’t seem to actively partake in.

One of the key moments I remember admiring the atmosphere of free speech on campus is when I read President Meric Gertler’s statement on the renewed conflict in the Middle East following the October 7th attacks. As someone who read statements from multiple universities on the conflict, I have to say that UofT’s is by far the best. The statement begins by acknowledging the gravity of the situation and the grief involved, but then moves to an instructive tone for what the campus community should look to do going forward. In paragraph seven, the statement says, “Our university must demonstrate to the world how civil, informed debate about difficult issues can be conducted. This means that uncomfortable, even upsetting positions will be expressed by members of our community. It is our collective duty to ensure that such perspectives, so long as they are lawful, continue to be heard, and that those who disagree can safely engage in respectful debate.” This is exactly what I want to be hearing from my university during times of strained free speech rights: not just an acknowledgement, but explicit protection of the rights of individuals to espouse even the most unpopular and upsetting positions, as long as they are not actively inciting violence or engaging in discrimination. The statement is absolutely correct in positing that respectful debate is the best way forward, and I for one am thrilled to see UofT furthering free speech rights.

To that end, and also in response to the Israel/Gaza conflict, UofT has appointed Randy Boyagoda as provostial advisor on civil discourse for an 18 month term in an effort to further bolster the free speech climate on campus. Boyagoda has previously served as president of PEN Canada, the Canadian chapter of an international non-profit which defends freedom of expression as part of its mission. On the subject of free expression and civil discourse, Boyagoda has said, “what’s important with civil discourse is to create the conditions, inside and outside the classroom, especially at a place as inherently and variously diverse as our university, for discussions that acknowledge difference while working towards shared understandings.” In essence, I believe his point of view can be summarized thusly: in times of intense ideological disagreement, the solution is more speech, not less. Where many universities may have taken the opportunity to install further administrative bureaucracy with the goal of limiting certain kinds of speech and “protecting students,” UofT decided to do the exact opposite and appoint an individual tasked with finding the best way to encourage civil and informed debate on campus. Boyagoda’s term just began on January 1st, and I think there’s a lot of opportunity here for him and his soon-to-be-formed working group to make progress on campus, even if it’s only on the margins. 

Despite having (what is in my mind) a solid foundation in place, and bolstering said foundation through actions such as Boyagoda’s appointment, there have been some recent (and notable) free speech missteps at UofT. On January 22nd, Omar Patel, an Imam with UofT’s Muslim Chaplaincy at the Scarborough campus since 2016, was told he was being removed from his role. Per reporting from The Varsity and CBC, the removal came as a response to an alleged anti-Israel post on his Instagram. Said post compared Israel’s actions against Gaza to those Nazi Germany took during World War II, thus labelling Israel’s actions as genocide by association. Many view comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany as themselves anti-semetic, hence why action was taken against Patel after Hillel Ontario, an organization that supports Jewish students on campus, submitted evidence of the post to UofT. While ensuring the safety of Jewish students on campus is paramount, I believe more should have been done to transparently investigate the matter; Patel claims that his employer, the Muslim Chaplaincy, was not involved in the process at all. While most of us can probably agree that the alleged contents of the post are rather unbecoming of a religious leader on campus, it still stands that personal posts on social media, even those many deem controversial, should not be the sole grounds for a firing. Per the Varsity, because of this action, Muslim students at UTSC now feel less supported, a rather obviously poor outcome.

Perhaps the biggest recent free speech misstep at UofT has come from the student side. At their November Annual General Meeting, the University of Toronto Mississauga Student’s Union (UTMSU) officially adopted a “pro-Palestine stance” that extends to all services and clubs funded by the union. The UTMSU has even explicitly stated that while they can’t force clubs to take certain positions, they can withhold funding and recognition should clubs not comply. These are exactly the kinds of repercussions for speech that cannot exist in a true environment of free expression. This motion is nothing short of a disaster for freedom of speech at UTM, and constitutes a blatant abuse of power by the UTMSU. All clubs recognized by the UTMSU are now dealing with forced association and compelled speech, things that are expressly forbidden under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and even the UTMSU’s own mission statement, which asserts that individuals have rights regardless of political opinion. This is to say nothing of how Jewish students at UTM must feel, with Hillel UofT calling the motion “unacceptable and dangerous”.

As members of a public institution, it is vital that we recognize and accept our role in promoting and maintaining a campus environment conducive to free speech. We therefore must learn to abstract our own opinions from our ideas on how speech should be governed, and foster an environment where even our ideological opposites can easily speak their minds. For example, I personally believe that communism is a regressive and deeply destructive ideology that has done irreparable damage to the world. But, when I came across students advocating for communism during the University of Toronto Students Union clubs fair in September, I engaged in a short conversation, shared my own point of view, and then told them how despite my difference in ideology, I wholeheartedly supported their right to be sharing their ideas on campus. Nobody alive is qualified to decide whether certain speech is inherently right or wrong. Therefore, we must have a free and open marketplace of ideas to even begin to triangulate around something that a plurality of us can agree on. I am proud to be a part of a UofT community that I believe does this quite effectively, but I also remain leery of potential future erosion of this strong culture of free expression. I encourage us all to actively participate in important discourse here at UofT, while also remaining vigilant for any threats to our inalienable rights.