Freedom of Speech and Harassment Guidance
The University has legal duties to ensure that Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom are promoted and secured for all of its members, staff, students and visiting speakers. See Reg. 29 Code of Practice relating to Freedom of Speech, Academic Freedom and the prevention of individuals from being drawn into terrorism for more information.
Freedom of Speech means the freedom to hold opinions and to share information and ideas without restriction. The only limits are those set by law and/or regulations, and these limits must be reasonable and proportionate, and necessary in a democratic society, for example, to protect other people’s rights.
Academic Freedom is part of Free Speech and gives academics additional protection to the extent that within their area of competence, research and academic expertise they are free, within the law, to research, question, test, and share ideas – however controversial, unusual or unpopular and even where they may shock or offend - without prejudicing their posts, prospects of promotion or prospects of being hired.
Warwick University is a vibrant and diverse community, where debate and challenge are encouraged in accordance with its core value of providing a space for the discussion of difficult topics. Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom are fundamental to the role of universities as places where the boundaries of knowledge are explored, challenged and extended.
The University is committed to providing an environment in which not only orthodox views and ideas, which are commonly well received, can be expressed, but also an environment in which conflicting, unpopular and controversial views can be brought forward, heard and considered. At the University we should expect to meet difficult and challenging ideas.
Finding something offensive does not automatically make it harassment. Freedom of speech allows for the expression of lawful opinions, even if others may find them uncomfortable or offensive.
Unlawful expression
There is, however, no absolute right to any speech or academic expression. Expression that breaches the law, for example: speech or expression which is defamatory, or which constitutes an incitement to violence or terrorism (or glorification or encouragement of acts of terrorism) or incitement to religious or racial hatred, or harassment or is in support of a proscribed terrorist organisation is unlawful and has no protection.
When expressing views and opinions we should remain mindful of our Dignity Principles and the effect we may have on others in our community. The same conduct may be lawful in some circumstances but unlawful (e.g. because it causes harassment) in others, dependent on context. Individuals, when articulating or opposing views, should be mindful of their obligations regarding behaving in a way that respects the rights and dignity of others.
Harassment
Harassment under the Equality Act 2010 is unwanted behaviour related to certain protected characteristics, which has the purpose or effect of:
• violating a person’s dignity, or
• creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for that person.
Harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 is conduct which amounts to harassment of another and which they know or ought to know (i.e. if the reasonable person in possession of the same facts would know) would amount to harassment of the other.
Where the intention or effect is to harass another, that conduct will be unlawful and/or contrary to our Dignity Principles, will not be tolerated and may be subject to disciplinary procedures.
Some scenarios which demonstrate Freedom of Speech vs Harassment:
Freedom of Speech (Lawful but Possibly Offensive)
Scenario 1 - Classroom Debate: Emma argues that immigration policies should be stricter, and another student strongly disagrees. The comments are blunt and may offend some, but they are lawful expressions of political opinion.
Why lawful: Political speech enjoys particular protection, and disagreement, even if uncomfortable or offensive, is part of academic debate.
Scenario 2 - Debate in a History seminar: Jay argues that colonialism brought economic development to certain regions. Others strongly disagree and feel the statement ignores oppression.
Why lawful: It’s an academic opinion about history, not a personal attack, even though it may cause discomfort.
Scenario 3 - Film Club Screening: The society shows an old movie that contains racial stereotypes. Some members feel uneasy watching it.
Why lawful: Showing historical or artistic works is protected, though organisers should acknowledge the problematic content.
These examples do not incite violence, hatred, or discrimination.
Harassment (Unlawful or Breaching Conduct)
Scenario 1 - Targeted Insults: Aysha repeatedly calls Liam derogatory names based on his sexuality via a group WhatsApp chat.
Why harassment: It’s directed at an individual who feels harassed and creates a hostile environment for the individual.
Scenario 2 - Repeated Racial Jokes in Meetings:
Tom and Luke frequently make “jokes” about certain ethnic groups during society socials.
Why harassment: Even if not aimed at one person, repeated derogatory humour can cause harassment (including to those not the subject of the words) and can create a hostile environment for people who are the subject of the words.
Exclusionary Messaging: A society advertises an event with slogans like “This is for real British students only.”
Why harassment: It excludes and demeans students of other backgrounds. It will also be discriminatory where the Equality Act applies.
If you have experienced or witnessed harassment, make a disclosure on our platform and get access to support.
Further Resources
Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023