“Whereof one cannot speak, one must remain silent” - Ludwig Wittgenstein
Indeed! It has taken me almost seven months to complete this article which I began in February 2018. For a number of reasons, I wavered but finally I decided to bite the bullet and complete what for me is not a happy exercise but a necessary one. And as Trinis say, “Gopaul Luck ain’t Seepaul Luck!”
But let me explain. Three events gave me real cause of concern. A criticism of a very senior academic by institutionalist, the call for the dismissal of outspoken colleague and friend Tennyson Joseph (I will confess that sometimes his articles made me squirm) because of comments on the abilities of current St. Lucian prime minister. Tennyson Joseph, quite frankly, whether we appreciate him or not, is no mealy-mouthed academic or intellectual. We also witnessed the case of Kristina Hinds and the calls for an apology and her dismissal or disciplining in the wake of the protest action at the Cave Hill Campus in February 2018. In the case of both Joseph and Hinds, these calls were not from the Cave Hill itself.
So, I am stepping out of my comfort zone over the next two or three weeks. Too many of us are silent, whether because of fear of victimisation of family or self. In academia for instance, we encourage our students to be fearless and to go into the unknown, but we remain timid, cowering in corners, whispering and raging in our close circles against the unjust, the corrupt, the bad decision, and the incompetent. But we remain openly silent, and play the games that the ambitious routinely engage in. We remain timid. Yes, timid in the face of institutional and personal ambitions, and we are cowed, in whatever institution we are located. And this is also true of academia where many of us have witnessed the attempts to muzzle very senior academics.
So, I began this journey in February 2018, and hopefully will complete it in what may very well turn out to be a two- or three-part series. It is still a work in progress.
What is academic freedom?
But if the truth be told, I wavered, partly because in my effort to defend, I became uncomfortable with all the elements of what academic freedom implies. Perhaps because they did not always conform to my own inner convictions and understanding of what is for some that elusive academic freedom. And as I read more on academic freedom and higher education; staff and expectations; the connection between academic freedom and rights and responsibilities; I became uncomfortable and sometimes perplexed. Uncomfortable, because all that reading made me question certain assumptions I held and certainly made me question at least one position I publicly took. And so, I shelved the article. But for me that in itself is dishonest, for one must manage the unpalatable. How can I critique behaviour without also coming to terms with my reluctance to deal with my own discomfort with what academic freedom implies? That was my conundrum and for seven months I hesitated.
Academic freedom is generally viewed as the freedom of the teacher or research worker in higher institutions of learning to investigate and discuss the problems of his science and to express his conclusions, whether through publication or in the instruction of students, without interference from political or ecclesiastical authorities, or from the administrative officials of the institution in which he is employed. That is, of course, unless his methods are found by qualified bodies of his profession to be clearly incompetent or contrary to professional ethics.
The right to academic freedom under international human rights law and UNESCO’s recommendation concerning the status of higher-education teaching personnel of 1997 describe academic freedom as:
“[T]he right [of such personnel], without constriction by prescribed doctrine, to freedom of teaching and discussion, freedom in carrying out research and disseminating and publishing the results thereof, freedom to express freely their opinion about the institution or system in which they work, freedom from institutional censorship and freedom to participate in professional or representative academic bodies. All higher-education teaching personnel should have the right to fulfil their functions without discrimination of any kind and without fear of repression by the state or any other source.”
We will need to judge for ourselves whether or not academics in their public pronouncements and publications really experience that expressed right to “freely express their opinion about the institution or system in which they work”.
Furthermore, one can resort to international public law {namely, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)} to get an insight into what academic freedom means. Specifically, five provisions under the ICCPR and ICESCR provide protection for the right to academic freedom. These are Article 19 of the ICCPR which speaks to the freedom of opinion and expression; Article 15 of the ICESCR on cultural rights—speaks treats the issue of the right of respect to “the freedom indispensable for scientific research”; and Article 13 of the ICESCR on the right to education. Furthermore, Articles 7 and 9 of the ICCPR prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and provides for the right to liberty and security of the person.
We can say that the right to freedom of opinion and expression (which is also a constitutional right) can be seen as the critical ingredient of the right to academic freedom. But many academics have been falsely imprisoned, arrested, demoted, dismissed, victimized, marginalized for their opinions by the institution in which they work and by the State itself. We know for instance that this is a common practice in many authoritarian States but it is also not unheard of in many democracies.
What do we make for instance of the 2001 case of Saad Idden Ibrahim, a sociologist at the American University in Cairo, who was sentenced to seven years in prison with hard labour for the crime of publicizing irregularities in the parliamentary elections of 1995? So the State charged Ibrahim and others with deliberately disseminating false information and malicious rumours about the country's internal affairs and tarnishing its reputation abroad. Let us also not forget that when scientist and Professor Galileo Galilei argued the Earth revolved around the sun, he was arrested by the Catholic Church, and forbidden to promote science that conflicted with Scripture. It took 360 years for the Church to apologize. Was it not Alexander Solzhenitsyn who spent most of his adult life in a Siberian prison because he stood up for truth and academic freedom?
But the Network for Education and Academic Rights (NEAR) has also made it abundantly clear that universities and colleges are often in the forefront of human rights abuses and are often embroiled in crises. So, for instance, in South Africa, at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) in 2006, some academics were singled out and punished for their outspoken views on the governance of the university. Rhodes University sociologist Professor Jimi Adesina, for instance, following his condemnation of a gagging order placed on the university community during its industrial strike in 2006, was ostracized by the University. So too were two union leaders, Professors Evan Mantzaris and Fazel Khan, who commented to the media on university issues. They faced disciplinary action and suspension from the university as well as banned from having any contact with university employees or any access to the campuses. But banning takes many forms; sometimes as punishment for outspokenness you become “invisible”.
When I listen to some of the comments which came out of the previous administration about statements made by academics and others on developments in Barbados, it sometimes occurred to me that had it been within their possibility, many persons would have been detained, silenced and imprisoned. And this was wrapped up in the image of Barbados’ international reputation.
Bigotry
These to me are critical. But that is where my disquiet came and it is the primary reason why I delayed the completion of this article. It is true many of us in academia are bigots. For we insist upon our academic freedom but we also deny others that same right. What do I mean by this? We insist upon the right to speak and the right to research and publish what we wish. But we do not always believe the same is true for those who do not hold our views. Too often what is acceptable in academia must be our truths, our worldview, no matter how rose-pink the glasses are. I am not a fan of Ben Carson, for instance, but why could he have not spoken at Johns Hopkins University's medical school convocation in Baltimore?
There is much more to say, of course … so next week.
(Cynthia Barrow Giles is a senior lecturer in political science at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus)
The post Bigotry: What academic freedom? appeared first on Barbados Today.
from Barbados Today https://ift.tt/2Pwm0AL
via IFTTT https://ift.tt/2wGzbbh
No comments: