Controversy and study not crimes
How far we have really come in the ‘war on terror’ when librarians are now brought to the forefront of political controversy? A helpful librarian could now be breaking the law as a result of a clause in the government’s new Terrorism Bill, concerning the dissemination of terrorist materials.
More widely and more worrying is the clear threat that the bill poses to academic freedom. The Association of University Teachers is concerned that the clause making “incitement” to commit terrorist acts a criminal offence could lead to unknown breaches of the law by academics, teachers and students alike. You’d better watch out what you say in seminars, as intent is not a precursor to prosecution as the bill stands.
Remember, this extends the terror laws that saw Walter Wolfgang detained for shouting ‘nonsense’ during the last Labour party conference. If used to justify the detention of OAP war veterans, then the worst can only be feared when applied to students and academics.
New guidelines issued by Universities UK dealing with intolerance and hate crimes on campus, reaffirms: “the principle of academic freedom is central to the work of Higher Education Institutions.” It is a cornerstone of our democracy which could now be severely restricted.
The AUT warns that a “culture of suspicion” could be created on campus, as teachers have to watch out what they teach and to whom. This is a ridiculous and discriminatory expectation of lecturers, whose responsibility is to teach, not to ‘screen’ those walking in and out of the lecture theatre. It could result in important topics being ‘left off the agenda,’ which would only have a detrimental effect on student learning.
Speaking with various students of the politics and history departments, many seem worried that their tutors may indeed be forced to “shy away” from certain issues as a result of the new law. This could include even historical study of, for example, Ireland or resistance in Apartheid South Africa, as they are shelved simplistically as ‘terrorist tactics,’ without scope for re-evaluation.
Moreover, student years are a time for activism. Universities have traditionally been at the forefront of political interrogation. This bill could cast a grave shadow over this, criminalising the expression of support for those who oppose oppressive political regimes.
The bill requires substantial amendments to protect our legitimate work. The AUT is lobbying for proof of ‘intent’ or ‘recklessness’ to be required for prosecution. The bill is unacceptably broad and lends an incredibly wide berth for subjective interpretation. Law should always be clear to those whom it governs.
