Is the Prevent Duty hindering free speech?

Universities have a statutory duty to secure freedom of speech. Yet the Prevent Duty places limits on this freedom. Student unions say that they have a right to refuse speakers. But what about the rights to freedom of speech under the Human Rights Act? Is there concrete evidence that free speech is being seriously suppressed? A report published in March 2018 finds out.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights, chaired by the MP Harriet Harman, published a report in March 2018 following research in the sector. The Committee found that a number of factors are limiting free speech including:

• intolerant attitudes, often incorrectly using the banner of ‘no platforming’ and ‘safe-space’ policies;
• incidents of unacceptable intimidatory behaviour by protestors intent on preventing free speech and debate;
• unnecessary bureaucracy imposed on those organising events;
• fear and confusion over what the Prevent duty entails;
• regulatory complexity;
• unduly complicated and cautious guidance from the Charity Commission;
• concern by student unions not to infringe what they perceive to be restrictions.

The Committee examined the impact of these factors on free speech in universities and makes recommendations for those involved.

Given the confusion and complexity about what is and is not permissible, the Committee have prepared a summary guide to help those organising debates navigate what is and is not within the law. The guide, contained in Annex 1 of the report, sets out five principles on upholding freedom of speech in universities:

1. Everyone has the right to free speech within the law.

2. Universities should seek to expose their members and students to the widest possible range of views–whilst ensuring that they act within the law

3. If a speaker breaks the law, it is the speaker who is culpable. However, if those organising an event invite speakers who they might reasonably have suspected would use their platform to break the law (i.e. because they have done so previously) they may fall foul of the law themselves

4. Protest is itself a legitimate expression of freedom of speech. However, protest must not shut down debate. Protesters who attempt to prevent viewpoints being heard infringe upon the rights of others. Student Unions, Universities and law enforcement must hold such people to account–and ensure that sufficient resources are in place to prevent protesters from blocking debate.

5. Students should not be deterred from organising events due to over bureaucratic procedures. Where free speech is inhibited, there should be recourse available to challenge that inhibition.

The guidance is designed for universities and students in England and Wales. The guide should also prove useful for colleges and also useful for universities in Scotland and Northern Ireland, even though different laws apply to these universities.

You can read the full report, including annexes, here

You can read a summary of the report here

You can read recommendations from the report here