University leaders call for exemption from anti-terror laws

Twenty-four university leaders have urged the government to exempt universities from the counter-terrorism bill or risk harming academic freedom

January 28, 2015

The group of vice-chancellors and chancellors write in a letter to The Times, published today, that the government “does not appear to have considered how the bill will relate to universities’ existing duties and codes of practice concerning freedom of speech and academic freedom”.

Signatories include Craig Calhoun, director of the London School of Economics; Dame Julia Goodfellow, vice-chancellor of the University of Kent and president-elect of Universities UK; Anthony Forster, vice-chancellor of the University of Essex; and Shami Chakrabarti, Essex chancellor and director of Liberty.

The government’s Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill, being debated in the House of Lords this week, would give the home secretary the ultimate authority to take legal action to force universities to ban “extremist” speakers from campus if they consistently failed to tackle concerns.

The bill puts a duty on specified public authorities, including universities, to “have due regard, in the exercise of its functions, to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism”.

The signatories to the letter say that they are “profoundly concerned about the consequences for UK universities”, noting that universities are “already supporting the government’s Prevent Strategy to counter terrorism and radicalisation” through existing obligations.

They add: “Universities are at their most effective in preventing radicalisation by ensuring that academics and students are free to question and test received wisdom within the law. The bill is not the best means of maximising the contribution universities can make, and may indeed be counterproductive, causing mistrust and alienation.”

And they continue: “To be truly effective in countering terrorism and radicalisation, universities must continue to be independent from government. The new statutory duty should not apply to universities and they should be exempt, as proposed for the security services and judicial bodies.

“This would safeguard the unique status of universities as places where lawful ideas can be voiced and debated without fear of reprisal.”

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Post-doctoral Research Associate in Chemistry

University Of Western Australia

PACE Data Support Officer

Macquarie University - Sydney Australia

Associate Lecturer in Nursing

Central Queensland University
See all jobs

Most Commented

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations

Mitch Blunt illustration (23 March 2017)

Without more conservative perspectives in the academy, lawmakers will increasingly ignore and potentially defund social science, says Musa al-Gharbi

Michael Parkin illustration (9 March 2017)

Cramming study into the shortest possible time will impoverish the student experience and drive an even greater wedge between research-enabled permanent staff and the growing underclass of flexible teaching staff, says Tom Cutterham