Thinking Allowed in the Academy

Paul M. Taylor
{"title":"Thinking Allowed in the Academy","authors":"Paul M. Taylor","doi":"10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The recent Review of Freedom of Speech in Australian Higher Education Providers ('the Review'), overseen by the Hon Robert French AC, identified areas for improving freedom of speech and academic freedom, and to that end proposed the adoption of umbrella principles embedded in a Model Code. The Review's engagement with international human rights law standards was confined, even though many are binding on Australia. As universities consider implementing the Review's recommendations, this article reflects on the Model Code in the light particularly of the standards established by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ('ICCPR'). If the drafters of the Model Code had paid closer regard to the ICCPR and other international standards, the result may have been a scheme that more clearly and predictably distinguishes permissible from impermissible restriction on free speech and academic freedom, and gives greater priority to promoting the human rights of those in the academic community than to the institutional power to limit them.","PeriodicalId":83293,"journal":{"name":"The University of Queensland law journal","volume":"13 1","pages":"117-146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The University of Queensland law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v39i1.3893","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The recent Review of Freedom of Speech in Australian Higher Education Providers ('the Review'), overseen by the Hon Robert French AC, identified areas for improving freedom of speech and academic freedom, and to that end proposed the adoption of umbrella principles embedded in a Model Code. The Review's engagement with international human rights law standards was confined, even though many are binding on Australia. As universities consider implementing the Review's recommendations, this article reflects on the Model Code in the light particularly of the standards established by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ('ICCPR'). If the drafters of the Model Code had paid closer regard to the ICCPR and other international standards, the result may have been a scheme that more clearly and predictably distinguishes permissible from impermissible restriction on free speech and academic freedom, and gives greater priority to promoting the human rights of those in the academic community than to the institutional power to limit them.
学院允许思考
最近由Robert French AC议员监督的澳大利亚高等教育机构言论自由审查(“审查”)确定了改善言论自由和学术自由的领域,并为此建议采用包含在示范守则中的总括原则。该报告与国际人权法标准的接触受到限制,尽管其中许多标准对澳大利亚具有约束力。在各大学考虑落实《审查报告》的建议之际,本文特别参照《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》确立的标准,对《示范法典》进行了反思。如果《示范法》的起草者更加注意到《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》和其他国际标准,其结果可能是制订一种办法,更清楚和可预见地区分对言论自由和学术自由的允许和不允许的限制,并更优先地促进学术界人士的人权,而不是重视限制他们的体制权力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信