“Freedom of speech is at the heart of college life.”
This is the response Dean Céitinn, the student director for Free Speech Ireland (FSI) and an M.Sc student at Trinity, gave when asked what role free speech should play in academic institutions.
“That’s something that we’ve tried to express through our Trinity declaration on academic freedom and freedom of expression. I think arts universities have a rich history of producing characters that risk causing offence to wider society […] like Oscar Wilde, George Berkeley, Jonathan Firth, Thomas Davis. But [vital to] producing characters like this is the protection of open debate and academic freedom, and something that’s achieved through [a college’s] entry into institutional neutrality…” he continued.
Free speech is the ability to express any opinions without censorship or restraint. It has been argued to hold a pivotal role in a college setting, complementing the atmosphere of intellectual debate and activism which is fundamental to higher education and academic freedom. This in turn can enable greater open debate, where students and the faculty can utilise their expertise to discuss and challenge ideas and contemporary issues – many of which are often new and controversial. Pro-free speech advocates emphasise its importance in ensuring that diverse viewpoints can be shared and debated in a place where students encounter a wide range of perspectives, often for the first time.
“[The] Bill will mark Ireland’s first hardline step towards criminalising hate speech in the wake of increasing right-wing tension”
But with political discourse becoming even more polarised, and discriminatory language often infiltrating college campuses, the new upcoming controversial 2022 legislation called the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill will mark Ireland’s first hardline step towards criminalising hate speech in the wake of increasing right-wing tension.
Yet this first piece of dedicated legislation has met fierce criticism. Even across the Atlantic, figures such as Donald Trump Jr. and Elon Musk have attacked the bill for infringing on freedom of expression, which is constitutionally protected in Ireland. So, with “hate speech”, “free speech” and “freedom of expression” becoming increasingly harder to define, how do students and those most prone to crossing that line view these distinctions?
“Hate speech has a clear agenda and purpose, which is to incite hate against another person/group. Hate speech is unproductive and combative in nature,” Eve Leslie, English and History student at Trinity, said in conversation with Trinity News.
Another student, Ella Chepak, a History major, said that the difficulty in differentiating between the two arises because people, in her opinion, may disagree on what constitutes incitement or harm.
“Free speech allows for the expression of ideas and opinions, even if they are unpopular, whereas hate speech involves language that intentionally incites violence or discrimination against individuals or groups based on characteristics like race, religion, or gender. While free speech is essential for democracy, it must be balanced with the responsibility to avoid language that can lead to real-world harm or perpetuate inequality,” she explained.
On the other hand, Miquel Ripoll, Philosophy and Maths student, stated that he does not “believe there is any clear distinction” between the two, because “the root difference [between them] is given by social context which cannot be seen as ‘objective’”.
When asked about the current policies Trinity has in place regarding free speech, many voiced their concerns regarding the culture of censorship around the college that restricts free speech. They cited the SU’s recent fine of €214,000 by Trinity for its revenue lost as a result of student protest (despite not being pursued) as an example of students’ rights to peaceful protest on campus being restricted.
Céitinn, student director for FSI, a free speech advocacy group, agreed that no topics should be off limits in university discussions.
“It’s fundamentally the role of being a university [to give platforms to open discussions]. I think universities are great instruments for the emergence of society, for academic and intellectual progress. And when we start to restrict other speech, it undermines the university’s capacity to do that. I’m not aware of a single time that [restricting free speech] worked out in the long run,” he explained to Trinity News.
“ ‘We would support the right of students to protest and to say what they believe even if that view is hateful…’ ”
“Speaking on behalf of Free Speech Ireland,” Céitinn continued, “we strongly support the right of free speech. We would support the right of students to protest and to say what they believe even if that view is hateful… I’d be concerned that maybe the culture of fear to speak openly about these issues, and censorship, has prevented either side from [engaging in a debate properly]. They assume the worst [about one another] in a way. And I think, both sides obviously have legitimate concerns, and I think that, through open dialogue, they’d be able to realise that.”
The issue of free speech has become even more relevant following allegations of antisemitism levied against pro-Palestinian protestors across all college campuses. Yet, as Céitinn expressed, TCD should facilitate opportunities for the two sides to engage in debate rather than try and silence one of the sides. He continued, quoting the Kalven Report: “‘The University is the home and sponsor of critics; it is not itself the critic’.”
He went on to provide an example of how debates are conducted within FSI: “From my experience speaking to both people within FSI that are pro-Palestine and that are pro-Israel, on either side, it’s driven by hateful beliefs. They just have different concerns. And the only way for those to be reconciled is through open dialogue. And I would hope that would be facilitated, through the college.”
Regarding Ireland’s upcoming Hate Speech Bill, Céitinn expressed his concerns that it might add to the growing culture of hesitancy.
“[It is] very draconian… The qualification for conviction under the Hate Speech Bill is very broad and demands speculation… It doesn’t define what hate means… I think it will have a chilling effect, and I think that’s compounded by the university adding institutional neutrality. They’re only making a situation worse than fostering a culture of fear among students,” Céitinn continued.
“I know that there was a planned debate in DCU, on the Israel-Palestine [conflict], that was cancelled last minute, and the debate still went ahead in a different venue off campus. And both sides were very civil, and both sides made interesting points,” Céitinn stated.
“…the Bill might lead to people worrying about crossing legal boundaries, and as a result, not engaging in open debates”
Not all students believe that the Hate Speech Bill will constrain their freedom of expression. Some think it presents an opportunity to promote respectful dialogue, although they are concerned that the Bill might lead to people worrying about crossing legal boundaries, and as a result, not engaging in open debates.
As Tom Merton, Law student at Trinity, stated; “the symbolic weight of the Act could result in people being more careful of what they say in general, which might stifle debate just as much as it protects people from being hurt….[but] it’s not as easy as ‘if the act passes, free speech is over’ or the other extreme…”
Regarding the role of universities themselves, Merton remarked: “It’s more up to the students than the university… I find it highly unlikely that hate speech would be a problem at Trinity, one of the most international universities in the world, with an overall extremely liberal community. Likewise can probably be said of many if not all universities in Ireland.”
Yet, as demonstrated, views continue to be clearly divided on several issues regarding the regulation of hate speech, but most fundamentally on what qualifies as hate speech. While some argue that there is a clear difference between freedom of expression and hate speech, others argue that the definition of the latter could be manipulated. It remains to be seen what impact the Hate Speech Bill could have upon free speech on campus, but one thing is for certain: this is sure to be a contentious issue in the coming years.
