Discussion Draft of Protest and Demonstration Policy
A Message from President HelmThursday, April 23, 2015 03:44 PM
In the days since my office provided a discussion draft of proposed revisions to the College’s existing protest and demonstration policy, I have received a great deal of feedback. The comments have included a variety of perspectives and opinions, including strong support of the draft policy, constructive criticism of specific provisions, outrage, and even some personal attacks on my values, character, and beliefs.
Two things have become quite clear as I read through the many communications I have received.
First, this is an important issue for our community, with a broad range of strong opinions. The topic (which involves free speech, public safety, individual rights, community standards) provides a valuable opportunity for us to model “reasoned and civil debate” as we seek to develop a policy that supports our values.
Second, we cannot take full advantage of this opportunity during the time remaining during this semester (and, consequently, during my term as president of the College). I believe the College will be best served by continuing this discussion – and the next phase of work on the policy -- into the fall semester. I have consulted with President-Elect Williams, and he concurs with this approach.
This memo is intended as an interim communication that, I hope, will help focus the community’s conversations and responses during the remainder of this semester, providing President Williams and the senior staff with food for thought as they organize the next phase of this policy development process.
In that context, I offer the following observations:
- The policy should not stifle or suppress dissent and protest. Any features of the policy that seem to have that effect will need to be carefully assessed to determine whether public safety concerns have been over-valued at the expense of freedom of expression. Having said that, public safety is an important priority. It is reasonable and necessary to ensure that fire and emergency exits are visible and unobstructed, and that members of the campus community (as well as visitors and guests) are informed of the nature, timing, and extent of demonstrations on campus property so they can decide whether to participate or avoid the area. Some commenters have objected to the notion of protest planners completing space reservation forms. Perhaps there is a better way of ensuring that both protesters and others may pursue their objectives safely. I am sure that the next draft would benefit from suggestions on this question.
- There seem to be differences of opinion on whether protests and demonstrations are, by their very nature, “disruptive.” Personally, I believe protests and demonstrations are intended to disrupt our complacency with the status quo and make us rethink important issues. They also provide an opportunity to communicate important messages to society at large and to authority. Not all disruption is violent, but some types of disruptive action may violate the rights of others. Obviously, some protests and demonstrations are designed to be violently disruptive (the Boston Tea Party, for example) while many of the most famous and successful protests and demonstrations have been peaceful and conducted with thoughtful advanced planning (Dr. King’s March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963, for example). The draft policy attempts to support the latter type of demonstration, but discourage the former. The next draft may benefit from a more precise definition of “disruption” that clarifies what qualifies as protected speech and what infringes on the rights of others.
- The current draft policy acknowledges (and future drafts must accommodate) the possibility of spontaneous demonstrations. I think most of us realize that demonstrations in response to current events cannot always be anticipated and planned far in advance, but we do need to make sure that the personal safety of both protesters and bystanders is adequately protected. It is important for those protesting to give as much notice as possible to those whose lives and work will be affected by their activities; furthermore, advance notice enables our campus safety officers to plan effectively for the safety and security of demonstrators whose actions may elicit negative or hostile responses from neighbors and bystanders. It is also important to protect, to the greatest extent possible, participation by community members in the academic enterprise that is at the core of our mission, including scheduled activities that represent the fruition of hard work and creativity by other members of our community. For example, a last-minute decision to stage a protest should not unnecessarily force the cancellation of a scheduled speaker, a dance performance, a play, a recital, laboratory research, or the like. While red tape should be kept to a minimum, clear and honest communication about planned activities are in everyone’s best interest.
- The provision that employees should seek permission from their supervisors before participating in protests and demonstrations, is not intended to discourage employee participation in political expression, but to ensure that students, faculty, and staff can depend on vital services even when protests are occurring. There are also legal restrictions on partisan political expression by employees, related to our tax-exempt status. Our policies need to respect these obligations as well.
I am sure that the current draft is not perfect. That is why it is a draft, and why it has been circulated for discussion. For those who have concerns about specific provisions or language in the discussion draft, I encourage you to share your suggestions of alternative approaches or wording.
I believe we can and must continue to have a civil and reasoned discussion about the best approach to these questions, and that our community can eventually arrive at a policy that, while it will not satisfy everyone, will protect the rights and personal safety of all of us.
