“In the exercise of my duties, I swear to uphold the law as the best way for human coexistence. I will strive for justice as a way to combat violence and assist those in need, serving every human being (…) and above all, I swear to defend freedom, for without it, there can be no law that survives, justice that is strengthened and peace that is made.” This quotation shares a part of my ethical oath that I took when I graduated from law school in Brazil, and it is an essential part of who I am.
As a student from another country, I’m proud of my decision to pursue a Master’s degree at Acadia University. My commitment to freedom remains strong. This is especially true when my own freedom, along with that of my community—in this case, the Acadia University students, campus, and community—is at risk.
In this reflection, I seek to contribute to and promote inclusive dialogue among students, given our challenge of calling for the Acadia University senior administration to reconsider and revise its current protest policy, doing so in the context of honouring the principles of trust and transparency vis-à-vis students and our campus community.
On 21 January 2025, Acadia University welcomed journalist, radio host, author and activist Desmond Cole to deliver the 2025 H. T. Reid lecture which he titled, “The Shakedown: Local Policing in Canada.” Desmond’s lecture attracted hundreds of students, faculty, staff, and local community members. With the University President and other senior administrators seated in front of him, Desmond discussed the issue of structural discrimination faced by marginalized groups, with a focus on racism inflicted on Black Canadians, Indigenous peoples, and other oppressed people by the R.C.M.P. and by other Canadian public institutions. In his interactive lecture and during the Q & A period following his talk, Desmond emphasized the University’s responsibility to support students in asserting their rights.
The day after Desmond delivered his public lecture, students engaged in a lunchtime conversation with him, an opportunity hosted by the Departments of Politics and History and Classics. During this discussion, a topic that was largely unknown to most attendees, including myself, emerged via students’ questions. The issue that multiple students raised, which sparked considerable outrage? Acadia University had approved a policy on 31 August 2024 called “Campus Protests and Demonstrations”. A copy of this document can be found at the end of this reflection or on the Acadia University webpage.
[URL: https://hr.acadiau.ca/files/sites/hr/Policies%20and%20Procedures/Campus%20Protests%20and%20Demonstrations%20Policy%20.pdf ]
Less than two weeks after Acadia approved the new protest policy, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) sent a letter on 10 September 2024 “to the presidents of more than 70 universities across Canada to draw their attention to the utmost importance of respecting students’ fundamental rights and freedoms on university campus, including their right to peacefully protest.” [emphasis added. URL: https://ccla.org/fundamental-freedoms/ccla-calls-on-universities-to-ensure-their-policies-respect-students-right-to-peacefully-protest-on-campus/]
Acadia University’s ‘protest policy’ was created and implemented without any consultation with the campus student body. Nor did the policy emerge from the University Senate process. The policy includes numerous prohibitions offering only vague definitions and guidelines. The policy presents a clear and evident potential to harm freedom of expression on campus. It should be noted that Desmond expressed his surprise and concern about the policy. He advised students to mobilize and strongly recommended that the media should be invited to be present at student protests.
I believe that Acadia University genuinely seeks to foster an environment that prioritizes student autonomy while ensuring safety and encouraging positive interactions on campus. This is why it’s essential to evaluate the current policy and consider potential reforms of the policy.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is embedded in the Canadian Constitution, defines the right to protest in this country. For instance, Section 2(b) of the Charter guarantees “freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression,” which encompasses the right to peaceful protest. Additionally, Section 2(d) ensures “freedom of association,” which can be interpreted as supporting students’ rights to organize and engage in collective protest actions.
Universities can restrict protest activities under certain reasonable conditions, especially if the protest threatens security. Nevertheless, these limitations must be carefully weighed against a rigorous standard. Universities must uphold a commitment to fair and reasonable constraints and importantly, openness, trust and transparency must characterize the process—including consultation with campus stakeholders—involved in developing policies concerning students’ rights to protest and express their views.
Acadia University is a “public university recognized under a public act.” Indeed, while our campus is duly proud of the fact that it is one of the oldest (founded in 1838) and most respected liberal arts universities in Canada, both the process and the content of the ‘protest policy’ dis-respect and undermine the very democratic principles that we learn about during our liberal arts education.
A protest policy should be drafted in a transparent process and composed with clear, descriptive wording. Otherwise, it can become an institutional control method. This can easily result in disproportionate penalties, especially for students from minority groups, such as Indigenous, Black, 2SLGBTQIA+, and international students, who already face challenges on campus.
A poorly designed policy—like this one approved last year in our campus—silences those who experience injustices or who seek to challenge dominant narratives, policy action(s) or policy inaction(s) on any number of issues.
Let’s take a closer look at this policy. I want to highlight a few critical flaws that stand out and deserve our attention:
5. Compliance
Failure to comply with this policy may result in actions by the university to restore order, which may include dispersal of the protest or demonstration, and in severe cases, appropriate disciplinary measures in accordance with the student non-judicial code of conduct, terms of employment, and/or collective agreements.
The most concerning aspect of Acadia University’s protest policy is its vague language usage, which would result in a failing grade in a law or policy course if the protest policy were an assignment. The vaguest article in the policy–on compliance—should be one of the most detailed sections in the protest policy. Sentences such as “which may include dispersal of the protest or demonstration” and “in severe cases, appropriate disciplinary measures” are unclear and open to different interpretations, both for those reading the policy and for those who may enforce it.
Many questions arise from just these two short sentences: What does “may include” mean in practice? How will “dispersal” be carried out? How does the university define “protest” and “demonstration”? What constitutes a “severe case”? What are “appropriate disciplinary measures”? How are these “disciplinary measures” determined? Will all students face the same response in every situation? I can ask a few more questions, but I’m confident that you grasp the issue at hand!
The purposefully vague terms used in the campus protest policy have already created uncertainty, fostered fear and raised concerns among students as they worry about the policy’s application and the lack of fairness. Given the #BlackLivesMatter and the #IdleNoMore movements, for example, would students have been able to assemble freely? Would their right to free speech have been respected or tolerated? In these unsettling times, we should not wait to test the limits of mere tolerance.
One of the key themes articulated by Desmond Cole in his book “The Skin We’re In: A Year of Black Resistance and Power” is the right to protest. He examines the myriads of ways that institutions seek to suppress and/or delegitimize these protests, particularly when they are led by marginalized groups. Desmond argues that protests demanding equality often face significant resistance, which is frequently framed as “disturbances to the public order” or as “threats” to social stability. This perspective silences dissent and maintains dominant narratives of power; indeed, it’s clear how this compliance section in Acadia University’s ‘protest policy’ can achieve such goals effectively.
In the same sense, the inclusion in Acadia’s policy that protests should only occur during “normal business hours” is problematic for many reasons and reflects a broader attempt at control. Let’s examine what Acadia’s policy states regarding this issue of when protests may be held on campus:
3.3. Time and Place Restrictions. – Protests and demonstrations are permitted during normal university business hours, defined as 8:30 AM to 10:00 PM, Monday through Friday, excluding statutory holidays.
Restricting protests to business hours effectively limits their impact, especially since protests aim to draw attention to issues that are often ignored or marginalized by society or institutions. If our students’ schedules are packed with classes, labs, athletic and other activities, and our studies, how can we protest during “business” hours?
Throughout human history, student activism, in Canada and around the world, has served as a powerful force in shaping public opinion and policy, addressing injustice and advancing equity and equality. Acadia’s policy overtly prohibits a sustained, prolonged (ie. 24-7) protests during an unprecedented time (ie. the existential crisis posed by climate ‘change’) with a range of urgent issues which impact youth most profoundly. Indeed, in this light the University’s protest policy can be seen, for example, to be a constraint (attack?) on our ability as youth to advance and secure intergenerational justice.
Acadia’s policy directive to keep protests solely within ‘normal business hours’ effectively secures ‘business as normal’ on any number of pressing issues that we learn about in our campus studies… including those issues that (will) impact young students much more profoundly than the older Acadia campus members who penned the protest policy behind closed doors.
Should students who are deeply committed to their university but can only find time to protest outside of business hours be denied that opportunity? Limiting the timing of protests is, in essence, a way of silencing voices and shredding our rights. Protests should not be constrained by arbitrary restrictions such as time, as they are vital to ensuring a functioning democracy where all voices are heard.
It is important to highlight a final point (among the many examples I could include in this reflection) regarding the policy. It is the section 3.2 in the “Guidelines for Protests and Demonstrations”:
3.2 No lmpediment to Regular University Business
Protests and demonstrations must not substantially and materially impede or disrupt the regular business of the university. This includes, but is not limited to, the obstruction of entrances or exits to buildings, disruption of classes, academic activities, and/or administrative functions, and interference with scheduled events. For further clarification, the following examples constitute forms of conduct that are not permitted under this policy:
Holding up signs, shouting, or playing loud music in a manner that substantially interferes with a speaker’s ability to be heard or a community member’s opportunity to listen (also known as “deplatforming”), particularly if done repeatedly or for a sustained period of time. By contrast, spontaneous or temporary interruptions are less likely to violate this policy.
What is the risk to campus security that a student will fight for his rights by holding a sign? Signs are one of the most basic ways to communicate the purpose and demands of a protest. When Martin Luther King Jr. marched on Washington D.C., the signs were everywhere, upheld in people’s hands. “Black Lives Matter”? Signs everywhere. “Women’s March” in 2017? Signs! “Idle No More” that began in Canada in 2012? More signs. Acadia University Faculty Association strike in 2022? Signs! Signs! Signs! Signs amplify the messages of those who may otherwise be silenced and should not be prohibited.
Those who have participated in a protest know that shouting or playing loud music are primary tools of protest. The person who protests needs to be heard, and if they have reached the point of needing to protest for something, it may be because they were not heard when they spoke low.
The term “deplatforming” should be used more responsibly in this document, as it is a controversial issue involving the balance between freedom of expression and the need to maintain a respectful environment. Balance cannot exist if one side is silenced (if it is not committing a crime). While “deplatforming” can serve as a tool to limit harmful speech, when misused, particularly regarding protests, it can significantly hinder marginalized groups from expressing their concerns and seeking justice.
To deny protestors the ability to use tools such as signs, shouting, or playing loud music is to ignore the lessons of history and the power of collective action.
In addition to the many questions asked in this reflection, I could write extensively about the issues with this protest policy and provide many arguments for why it needs reform. However, the university has the obligation to formulate and implement a comprehensive policy that acknowledges and respects the diversity within the student body. Everybody involved in approving this ’protest policy’, including those professors who publicly express pride in this flawed and poorly constructed policy, must reflect on and rectify this mistake.
Our University failed to heed the caution articulated below by The Centre for Constitutional Studies in the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta:
As universities grapple with what expression to allow, they would be wise to examine and apply the values enshrined in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms in crafting transparent policies. Creating or adjusting policies to be more informed by Charter values would allow for more uniformity across university campuses, instilling the same or similar levels of academic freedom and freedom of expression across the country’s university communities. It would also help guide universities with what expression should be allowed and which should be banned or restricted. Given the important role of universities in our democracy, the curtailing of freedom of expression there must be done carefully. It is a context in which losing one’s free expression holds a great deal of weight. [emphasis added. URL: https://www.constitutionalstudies.ca/2017/10/free-expression_-do-canadian-universities-make-the-grade_/?print=print}
It is important to note that our University is situated on the unceded territory of the Mi’kmaq. Furthermore, it is located in a region in which a policy of slavery of African Nova Scotians persisted for hundreds of years, until the 1833 Slavery Abolition Act. In this context, legally and ethically, Acadia can and must do better than what is reflected in its new ‘protest policy.’
Our campus fundamentally serves as a center for sharing ideas and engaging in diverse debates. Acadia University’s policy ignores the conversation across Canada, and silences critical student voices as shared by Saher Ahmed, the manager of global engagement at the University of British Columbia Okanagan Campus and a Ph.D. student, in the quotation below (University Affairs, 4 February 2025):
“This active resistance must be viewed as an opportunity for campuses to become fertile grounds for critical thinking and societal change. This means rejecting the urge to contain, sanitize, or depoliticize ideas for comfort or stability. Instead, we must allow our students to wield ideas as tools of resistance – tools that challenge the structures that seek to silence them.
…
While I don’t have a comprehensive list of actions to suggest, nor do I want to oversimplify the task, witnessing and listening are crucial. This can be done in the following ways:
• Embrace disruption: View student resistance and disruptive ideas as opportunities for institutional growth rather than threats to stability.
• Facilitate student engagement: Create platforms for students to voice concerns safely without risk and engage in meaningful dialogue on global issues.
• Integrate global issues into services: Ensure student services foster critical inquiry, challenge power structures and address systemic inequalities.
• Reflect on institutional practices: Assess and confront your institutions’ role in perpetuating societal issues, ensuring they don’t simply observe but actively address them.
Above all, we need to reframe student resistance as not only a response to national and global issues but as the outcome of unresponsiveness and the politics of unpreparedness.” [URL: https://universityaffairs.ca/opinion/reflections-on-a-transformative-era-in-global-politics/ ]
As a significant higher education institution with deep roots in Canadian history, Acadia University has a duty to establish clear and transparent guidelines for the application of policies related to protests. This commitment demonstrates dedication to fostering open discourse and ensuring that any restrictions imposed are fair, proportional, and transparent, not vague and lacking in specificity, as is seen in current policy.
Acadia University needs to clearly and collaboratively define a peaceful protest policy with students, the ASU, and the campus community. A clear, reasonable and ethically grounded protest policy that is generated through a deeply democratic deliberative consultation process will ensure that Acadia University promotes an environment in which the open exchange of ideas and respectful discourse are encouraged and supported, with security assured for all who are engaging peacefully, undertaken in a way that respects, protects, and promotes students’ rights.
*Daniel Saunite Filho is a Master’s student in the Department of Politics.
*Please attach a copy of the protest policy at the end of this article.
