http://www.trentarthur.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1334&Itemid=1
Robert F. Clarke, Head Librarian
Dr. Robin Lathangue, Head of Colleges
Meri Kim Oliver, Sr. Director of Community Affairs and Senior Partnerships
Don Cumming, Sr. Director of Public Affairs
Dear Mr. Clarke, Dr. Lathangue, Ms. Oliver and Mr. Cumming,
We are writing to raise concerns and questions about your decision to have the Israeli Apartheid Week poster removed (or its Latuff image replaced) from the Bata library showcase by the end of the day on March 4. Mr. Clarke’s e-mail to the Peterborough Coalition for Palestinian Solidarity states that your decision was made on the grounds that the Latuff image “communicates an inflammatory message”. Yet you provided no explanation to accompany this highly charged accusation.
We are also deeply troubled about the level of intimidation implicit in your “request” that the students of PCPS “voluntarily remove or replace the other copies of the poster containing the Latuff image”. We find it extremely irresponsible, and possibly actionable as harassment, for the university Administration to deliver such a “request” without a) citing the policy grounds for it, and b) informing the students about the penalties they face for non-compliance.
As faculty members of the Trent University community, we take freedom of expression on campus very seriously and are demanding that you provide the university community with the following information about your decision:
1) What do you mean by “inflammatory message”? What message, in particular, do you consider “inflammatory”? How is it “inflammatory”? Why was this explanation not provided to the students, in writing, at the time your decision was issued to them?
2) What university policy was used as the basis for your decision? What specific policy identifies “inflammatory message” as a violation, and what is the penalty for not conforming to it?
3) Your letter states that “the University is committed to working with all parties involved in this issue to promote a dialogue”. Which “parties”, specifically, are you referring to as being “involved in this issue”? We consider faculty to be a signifcant party in our university administration’s decision to ban a poster from campus, and yet we have not been consulted or invited into the dialogue. Who, then, is in this “dialogue”? What requests are other “parties” making, and what demands are you imposing on “parties” other than the PCPS? We are asking that you provide a full account of the actions, parties and processes that led up to this decision.
Finally, we want you to bring to your attention an Open Letter to defend freedom of speech, particularly as it regards Palestinian rights at Canadian universities. This letter has been signed by over 370 faculty from over 40 Canadian universities. Many of us are members of Faculty 4 Palestine network, and we can assure you that Trent Administration’s actions will be given due attention as we move ahead with this national campaign.
You can view the Letter and the signatures at the following link:
http://www.caiaweb.org/node/1148
Sincerely,
A. Haroon Akram-Lodhi, International Development Studies
Feyzi Baban, Politics Department
Chris Beyers, International Development Studies
Davina Bhandar, Canadian Studies
Marion Boulby, Department of History
Paula Butler, Women’s Studies
Nadine Changfoot, Politics Department
Sally Chivers, Canadian Studies
Gavin Fridell, Department of Politics
Margaret Hobbs, Women’s Studies
Chris Huxley, International Development Studies/Sociology
Paul Kellogg, International Development Studies
Winnie Lem, International Development Studies
Paul Manning, Anthropology
Barbara Marshall, Department of Sociology
Anne Meneley, Anthropology
Mary-Jo Nadeau, Department of Sociology
Michael Neumann, Department of Philosophy
Colleen O’Manique, Women’s Studies
Bryan Palmer, Canadian Studies
James Penney, Cultural Studies
Paul Shaffer, International Development Studies
Jacqueline Solway, International Development Studies/Anthropology
Carol Williams, Women’s Studies