It has been challenging for evidence-based thinkers to confront opinions shaped by confusion and conspiracy. In Aotearoa New Zealand freedom of expression, or as it is also described, freedom of speech or free speech is centre stage.
This is a good thing. By examining and debating what freedom of expression is, its value to society and its fundamental importance to a functioning democracy we can reflect on the risks posed to society if those freedoms are curtailed. We do not need to look far to see those risks in action.
At Waipapa Taumata Rau, the University of Auckland, we are engaged in a dialogue and consultation on a Freedom of Expression policy and an associated policy on Academic Freedom.
Along with a legal requirement for universities to perform the role of critic and conscience in society, we have examined the nexus of these three interrelated but not interchangeable rights and responsibilities.
Within the university context, academic freedom and criticism and conscience establish an environment providing for institutional autonomy and for a mandated and preserved role for academics to exercise freedom of inquiry and research, teaching and expert public commentary.
Our university is a large and diverse institution that by its very nature is rich in knowledge, opinion and viewpoints. On our campuses, ideas and opinions are argued, tested and freely expressed.
In the United States, we have seen some universities develop policies to “protect” students from what are seen as controversial issues which some describe as harmful. At the University of Auckland, we reject this approach.
Academic freedom is a fundamental tenet of the university. Further, we uphold the rights of staff, students and citizens to free speech — that is, the right to express one’s opinion.
We have a responsibility to encourage debate on all topics and to teach students to be able to consider and debate controversial issues both within the university and in embracing the freedom of expression in our wider community.
Universities have a duty to their students and communities to advance learning, develop intellectual independence and debate knowledge and ideas. We believe there is much to learn in debating ideas and in hearing opposing views.
As a society, we must safeguard the right to freedom of expression. For this reason, while the Government has chosen to extend the Human Rights Act to include religious belief, it is heartening the Government has also asked Te Aka Matua o te Ture — the Law Commission — to undertake an independent first principles review of legal responses to hate-motivated offending and speech.
Often issues and ideas that people want to discuss touch on our core beliefs and identities. Debates and discussions focus on the controversial and the unpopular. Discussion and debate may offend people.
The concepts of “harm” or “intent to harm” are notoriously difficult to assess, and constraining speech based on these can be easily misused. We must be vigilant when assessing harm.
New Zealand does not have a strong tradition of public debate nor of discussing serious issues at length. We err towards pragmatism and our small society can quickly coalesce around a single viewpoint.
We must move on from this, challenging ourselves to embrace opinions and listen to ideas that we do not share. We must strive to create an environment where people are willing to express a counter-view and where they will not be attacked in social media for doing so.
Waipapa Taumata Rau will next year host public lectures by leading thinkers on topical issues. We expect them to be challenging and we expect some will disagree with the views expressed. Ideally, the lectures will be followed by a respectful and robust debate. For our democracy to remain strong, we must defend and promote freedom of expression.
Our university is committed to this.
· Professor Dawn Freshwater is Vice-Chancellor at Waipapa Taumata Rau University of Auckland
