Consultation on freedom of speech

• Draft principles (Section 2)

  These principles articulate the University’s proposed position on FoS and form a key element of this consultation:

  1. Freedom of speech is the hallmark of a free and democratic society and fundamental to our role and purpose as a University. Hearing, discussing and debating diverse perspectives allow us to grow, learn and hone our critical thinking skills, while the open and rigorous contestation of ideas helps drive knowledge and discovery in research and education.
  2. Facilitating an environment where students and staff are exposed to different ideas and perspectives and are able, and enabled, to question, critique, challenge and discuss is a responsibility St Andrews takes extremely seriously.
  3. Our University should be a place where we are educated and enabled to disagree, discuss, and debate ideas and views openly and with civility, and we all have a role to play in creating a compassionate and inclusive culture. By fostering a culture of mutual tolerance and respect, we strengthen freedom of speech by ensuring that all voices can be heard, and that the diversity of views is recognised and respected.
  4. While we expect debate to be conducted in a constructive and civil manner, it is not the University’s role to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they disagree with, or which offend, shock, or disturb. Debate or deliberation should not be suppressed because the ideas or views put forward are considered to be offensive, immoral, or ill-considered. Instead, we seek to create an environment in which such ideas and views can be open to evidence, interrogation and challenge.
  5. Our University should be a place where everybody is encouraged and enabled to exercise the rights entailed by freedom of speech. The University will support members of the University community to navigate and exercise their freedom of speech, especially in circumstances in which they are threatened or are rendered vulnerable as a consequence. This includes defending academics’ freedom to undertake research that departs from, is critical of, or challenges current political and/or national agendas and orthodoxies and dominant narratives or beliefs. In doing so, the University recognises the fundamental importance of freedom of speech and academic freedom to a thriving democracy.
  6. However, freedom of speech, including academic freedom, is not an unqualified right. There are legal boundaries to freedom of speech, and both the University and members of the University community have obligations to ensure they stay within these boundaries; this includes refraining from using the right to expression to threaten, bully, or harass, or incite discrimination or violence.
  7. There are also other legal responsibilities to which the University is subject to, including requirements under the Public Sector Equality Duty to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations. This may mean that, on occasion, the University needs to put in place measures to restrict expression that violates, or may violate, the law, or to regulate the time, place, and manner of expression to support the safety and wellbeing of members of our community.
  8. These are, however, narrow exceptions to the general principle of freedom of speech and should never be used to hinder the free and open discussion of ideas. In cases where freedom of speech is constrained in any way, the University will always seek to explain the rationale behind any decisions that it takes and provide mechanisms by which these decisions may be challenged or appealed.
  9. While the University has a central role in creating environments that uphold freedom of speech, every member of our community is accountable for their individual actions and words, not just what they say but the way in which they say it, and being mindful of any wider roles and responsibilities they have within the University, including as teachers, providers of pastoral support and senior leaders.
  10. The University recognises the evolving landscape around freedom of speech and that this statement and its operationalisation will require regular review to reflect changes in the political, cultural, and legal landscape, as well as our own learning as our principles and guidelines are tried and tested. This commitment will ensure we continue to be a world-leading institution which champions free speech and perpetuates a culture of freedom of expression within our wider society.

• Operationalisation of FoS principles within the University (Section 3)

  Effective operationalisation of the FoS principles requires us to consider how we build understanding and awareness of FoS, and how we secure it in practice. The Group identified four areas as key to effective operationalisation: training and guidance, policy and procedures, behavioural expectations, and governance and support.

  Training and guidance

  Building a greater understanding and awareness of FoS across our staff and student community is key to upholding the principles. To support this aim we believe it is necessary to:

  • embed FoS into mandatory training around EDI and core pathways (for example, matriculation and induction), revising existing training as required and developing new training informed by sectoral guidance
  • support staff and students to develop skills in areas that support FoS, such as:
    • understanding FoS, responsibilities and the support available
    • managing and resolving conflict
    • creating ‘safe spaces’ for respectful debate
    • using social media responsibly
    • understanding the relationship between FoS and other priorities and requirements (for example, EDI, research governance, good pedagogical practice and University values)

  We recognise the particular importance of enabling FoS within our learning, teaching and assessment settings and supporting educators.

  In that context, we think it will be important to:

  • develop guidance and training on pedagogical tools such as positionality exercises, creating respectful spaces and language scenarios, ensuring they are implemented in line with FoS legislation and sector best practice
  • provide staff with access to targeted training to understand these concepts and apply them effectively, fostering classrooms where challenging ideas can be explored constructively while maintaining an inclusive, supportive and respectful learning environment
  • embed training around FoS into existing teaching training, including the mandatory training for PGRs who teach, and optional pedagogical training available to staff

  The University will also support schools to embed FoS into their own training, for example, for PGRs who teach, for PhD supervisors, and for new staff.

  We know navigating FoS is complex. To aid understanding we believe there would be value in:

  • developing a bank of scenarios and examples to translate Freedom of Speech principles and guidance into relevant, practical, real-world situations, which might include examples in relation to:
    • expressing ideas and opinions within a classroom setting
    • navigating tensions between institutional policies and personal expression
    • digital expression and online harassment
    • political activism on campus
    • controversial speakers or events

  We recognise these complexities are not unique to St Andrews and speak to wider debates around FoS. As such, we propose to supplement work on the operationalisation of the FoS principles with a number of events to explore freedom of speech as an intellectual concept and construct, and how it connects to important topics like power, democracy, and censorship.

  Policies and procedures

  Policies govern the way in which the University works, providing a framework for consistent decision-making and actions. They provide a key lever for enabling, or constraining, FoS making it important that information about the University’s position on FoS is consistently embedded across all relevant policies and procedures.

  To do that, we consider it appropriate to:

  • develop a standard statement to be included in all relevant policies to make it clear that such policies should not be used to restrict freedom of speech or academic freedom
  • review any existing policies that make explicit reference to reputational damage to the University and ensure such mentions are appropriate and proportionate
  • add a question about possible impacts on freedom of speech as part of the guidance notes included in the standard policy template, requesting explicit consideration of FoS impacts whenever a new policy is proposed, or an existing policy is reviewed, which will also highlight the need for policies to be written in neutral language avoiding ideological statements
  • list key policies relevant to upholding FoS, for example, the External Speakers policy, on a FoS webpage

  Behavioural expectations and good citizenship

  We recognise the tricky intersection between FoS and behavioural expectations where a balance requires to be struck between our legal right to say something and our responsibilities to one another as members of a community and institutional values. This is not about restricting FoS but about us all being mindful of the impact of our words, thinking about what we say, when and how, and taking accountability for what we say.

  To support this approach, we think it will be important to:

  • review and update content within our student conduct and HR policies, as well as information provided during matriculation and induction, to ensure it strikes the right balance between community responsibilities and values and FoS
  • review and enhance information on reporting mechanisms, such as Report and Support, to ensure clarity on FoS and how it is upheld within the University
  • place an emphasis on accessing, discussing and debating diverse perspectives in the context of a culture of mutual toleration
  • explore and articulate the intersections between behaviours and FoS as part of current work, under the auspices of the Diverse Action Plan, to develop a set of behavioural expectations

  Governance, advice and appeals

  Committees and other structures have an important role to play in upholding the FoS principles. For example, committees with oversight of research planning, funding and support must ensure that their decision making reflects the importance of supporting the range of research at St Andrews, irrespective of current national agendas.

  Only through such active reflection can the commitment to independent, critical research be maintained. Similarly, those tasked with overseeing teaching must ensure that pedagogical practice supports the principles.

  To that end, we suggest it would be appropriate to:

  • ask relevant committees, and particularly those overseeing teaching and research, to consider the implications of the FoS principles for how they operate and outline any planned changes to support FoS

  The Group considered that there were sufficient existing routes for any concerns about FoS to be raised and investigated, for example, through student conduct processes, but highlighted the need for greater awareness of different channels and appropriate sources of support especially for those tasked with adjudicating on FoS matters.

  In that context, we believe there would be value in:

  • setting out on an FoS webpage the routes for raising any complaints or concerns about FoS
  • providing a list of named contacts with responsibility for FoS at an institutional level, and those responsible for championing FoS in a research and teaching context
  • establishing a FoS Advisory Group to provide advisory support to relevant policy leads and adjudication panels on FoS-related matters

  The Group also recognised the underpinning importance of communications in keeping staff and students informed about FoS, outlining the University’s approach, and providing examples on FoS in practice, as well as signposting to training and other resources.

• Freedom of Speech Working Group

  Context

  • Changing legislative context including Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 (does not apply to Scottish Universities but part of the landscape within which they work) and Scottish Government Hate Crime & Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021
  • Challenges in implementing legislation in practice, particularly where there are competing rights, for example, around FoS and equality duties
  • Issues surfaced through the Israel-Gaza conflict and associated implications, for example, community relations and changes to course material and approach
  • Changing student views on the acceptability or otherwise of discussions on contentious issues

  Remit

  The overarching purpose of the Group is to set out how FoS can best be operationalised within the St Andrews community context.

  Within this overarching purpose a number of specific objectives have been identified, namely to:

  • Agree working definitions of Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom
  • Identify a set of core principles around FoS that enable discussion and critique within a culture of tolerance and respect (Diverse Action Plan – Action 7)
  • Consider how FoS is enabled in a pedagogical context and develop mechanisms to support FoS in the classroom
  • Consider how FoS is enabled and supported in a research context
  • Establish mechanisms for navigating potential tensions between FoS and other legislation including around equalities and hate crime
  • Identify any policy implications arising from the work on FoS
  • Outline a proposed governance structure for ensuring effective oversight of FoS

  Approach

  This work is likely to involve:

  • Learning from practice e.g. discussions with academics around how they navigate the sensitivities around FoS and student concerns and approaches used
  • Development of training / guidance e.g. around how to have discussions on sensitive / controversial topics
  • Review of other University approaches to implementing FoS
  • Consultation with the University community e.g. through focus groups and drop-in sessions
  • Series of events exploring the concept of FoS and associated philosophical debates

  The work may be taken forward by a number of sub-groups recognising the different strands of activity.

• Members of the FoS Working Group

  • Sharon Ashbrook, School of Chemistry (Senate Assessor)
  • Alex Chun, President of Wellbeing and Community (from August 2025)
  • Ros Claase, Director of Student Experience
  • Paul Cruickshank, Associate Dean (Students – Science) (Senate Direct Electee)
  • Pamela Dobson, Executive Officer, People and Diversity
  • Mike Gettinby, Chief Legal Officer
  • David Herd, The Berry Chair of Literature and Human Rights, School of English
  • Jane Illes, School of Medicine (Senate Direct Electee and Chair of Athena Swan Implementation Group)
  • Heather McNeill, Deputy Academic Registrar
  • Paulette Nhlapo, Head of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion
  • Akira O'Connor, School of Psychology and Neuroscience (Race Equality Charter Chair)
  • Muireann O'Dwyer, School of International Relations (UCU nominee)
  • Catherine O’Leary, AVP Dean of Arts and Divinity (Working Group Co-Chair)
  • Anindya Raychaudhuri, School of English (Senate Direct Electee)
  • Caitlin Ridgeway, Director of Wellbeing (until August 2025)
  • Niall Scott, Vice-Principal Communications
  • Rebekah Widdowfield, Vice-Principal, People and Governance (Working Group Chair)

• Definitions for the FoS review

  In this review, we are using the following short definitions of FoS and academic freedom used by Embedding Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom in EDI by David Bass, published by Advance HE in September 2025.

  Freedom of speech: the right to express opinions without censorship or restraint, within the limits of the law. In HEIs, this includes students, staff, and visiting speakers.

  Academic freedom: The right of academics to freely conduct research and express views within their area of research, professional expertise and competence, even if those views are controversial or unpopular.

  These definitions are underpinned by legislation.

  Freedom of speech emanates from Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights which is incorporated in Scotland and the rest of the UK by the Human Rights Act 1998.

  Article 10 states:

  1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
  2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

  Academic freedom is protected under UK law and international human rights frameworks, for example, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

  In Scotland, the Higher & Further Education (Scotland) Act 2005 obliges the University to:

  • (a) uphold so far as the University considers reasonable the academic freedom of all people involved in teaching, the provision of learning, and research
  • (b) ensure so far as the University considers reasonable that appointments held or sought and entitlements and privileges enjoyed by relevant persons at the University are not adversely affected by the exercise of academic freedom by any people involved in teaching, the provision of learning, and research.

  The position in England and Wales is different as obligations and rights flow from the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023. This Act led to guidance from the Office for Students which does apply in Scotland.

  Intersection with other legislation

  Freedom of speech and academic freedom are essential but not absolute rights; both the University and the University community must act within legal boundaries. This includes refraining from using expression to threaten, bully, harass or incite discrimination or violence.

  The University also has obligations under the Public Sector Equality Duty to eliminate unlawful discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations. This may mean that, on occasion, the University needs to put in place measures to restrict expression that violates, or may violate, the law, or to regulate the time, place and manner of expression to support the safety and wellbeing of members of our community.