Concordia University

University policies

The Statement of Principles of the Concordia University (Concordia) Code of Rights and Responsibilities (Code) states:

All Members have the freedom of conscience and religion; freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression; freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, the whole subject to the limits recognized by law and University policies and procedures.

The Code is not to be applied in such a way as to detract from the right of Members to engage in the frank discussion of potentially controversial matters, such as race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, politics or religion. Furthermore, the Code shall not be interpreted in such a way as to limit the use of legitimate instructional techniques, such as irony, argument, conjecture and refutation, or the assignment of readings, which may present a controversial point of view.

The Code (Section V, Article 36) has the following policy on “Communication of Discriminatory Matter”:

It is an offense for a Member to engage in the distribution, communication, publication or public exhibition by any means of any matter deemed to be discriminatory or to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination, as contemplated under the Québec Charter of Human Rights or under the Canadian Human Rights Act, and for which there is no bona fide and reasonable justification.

Section V, article 43 of the Code addresses the conflict between the right to peaceful assembly with the right of members of the University to go about their studies appropriately undisturbed.  It recognizes the importance of free expression in the form of peaceful protest, by prohibiting the following:

Obstruction or disruption of teaching, research, administration, study, student disciplinary procedures or other University activity.  Notwithstanding the preceding, Members are free to engage in peaceful and orderly protest, demonstration, and picketing that do not disrupt the functions of the University. For example, peaceful picketing or other activity in any public space that does not impede access nor interfere with the activities in a class or meeting is an acceptable expression of dissent and shall not be considered an infraction of this article.

The Policy on the Recognition of Student Organizations and the Use of University Space explicitly states that the University will not try to censor or restrict the materials displayed or used on campus space, provided the manner in which the materials are presented complies with the Code. It states “[f]reedom of expression is a fundamental principle and one which is a prerequisite to the essential mission of a university, namely the pursuit of knowledge. This principle requires the ability to question and debate any subject even the most controversial.”  It further states that “[w]hile the University is committed to promoting freedom of expression, it has a concurrent responsibility to ensure that all of its members can reasonably expect to pursue their work and studies in a safe and civil environment.”

However, the Policy also states that University officials reserve the right to restrict campus-space booking on the basis of high demand for a particular space, as well as on the basis of discretion.  Section 15 of the Policy states:

University space and facilities may be made available to recognized student associations and organizations for extra-curricular activities.  The University, however, shall be under no obligation to permit such use and is free to exercise its discretion in permitting it.

Concordia’s Policy on the Display of Posters states that:

Only posters announcing activities to be held at the University or which are of special inter­est to the University community and are sponsored by a legitimate University group, shall be approved for display. Posters by any other group, whether internal or external, shall not be approved and, if displayed, shall be removed without further notice.

An advisory group on Equity, Diversity and Inclusion is provided with resources at Concordia University.

University practices

In March 2019, it was reported that Concordia University’s Liberal Arts College invited Harvard University professor Harvey C. Mansfield to deliver a keynote presentation at the 40th anniversary gala of the college. However, Professor Mansfield’s invitation was rescinded after a dozen Concordia alumni complained about Mansfield’s conservative leanings on topics such as modern feminism and affirmative action. Mansfield’s speech was not going to address either of those subjects; rather, Mansfield was invited to talk about Niccolò Machiavelli and Alexis de Tocqueville, as he is a world-class expert in their works.

After Mansfield’s invitation was rescinded, the gala was postponed from May until September, and Mansfield was not re-invited.

A lecture by Canadian Liberal MP Marc Garneau scheduled for January 12, 2015 was cancelled on that day due to concerns expressed by Montreal Police of a planned “hostile and violent” protest disrupting the event.  The talk, organized by the two groups external to Concordia, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting (CAMERA) and the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research (CIJR), addressed Canada-Israel relations and was to take place at CIJR’s downtown Montreal offices, which are located next to Concordia University’s downtown campus.  It was cancelled by the organizers.  One of the organizers of the event, Concordia student Bradley Martin, explained that the event’s protest was estimated to consist of about sixty demonstrators and considered to be hostile and violent.  It was determined that the venue could not be secured properly and the safety of attendants would be at risk. It was therefore decided that the event would not take place as planned.

The event was rescheduled and took place in March, at a more secure location further away from campus.  The University did not issue a statement regarding the cancellation of the event.

In response to a referendum vote compelling the Concordia Students’ Union (CSU) to endorse the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, on December 5, 2014, Concordia University president Alan Shepard issued a statement upholding free speech and academic freedom:

Last week, the Concordia Student Union (CSU) included a referendum question on its by-election ballot asking its membership whether they approved of the CSU endorsing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.

I have heard from a number of members of our community who worry that this issue is divisive and could create an unwelcoming environment on campus.

The result of the vote is independent of the university.

In my view, a boycott barring us from contact with other universities and scholars would be contrary to the value of academic freedom that is a pillar of Concordia and of universities all over the world.

That freedom — to think the thoughts we want to think, to test ideas however controversial — is the bedrock of university life. Boycotts by definition foreclose all opportunities for such a free exchange of ideas and perspectives.

In cases that are as complex as the one at hand, questions of how the discussion, debate and aftermath are conducted are as important as the outcome.

All members of our community have an obligation to uphold the principles of academic freedom, free speech and mutual respect.

I wish to affirm strongly my commitment to these values.  These are not hollow placeholders but essential values.

I call on everyone in the Concordia community to work together to sustain an environment in which all of us are emotionally and physically safe and secure.

Only in such an environment can we truly pursue the freedoms of education.

On April 29, 2013, a satirical article was posted to the news blog “Coop média de Montreal” (CMM) titled “Interview with Sociologist Nixed by Vic Toews’ Office”.  Written by David Bernans, the article told a fictional story of a request made by Concordia University to the office of federal Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, to hold an on-campus interview with Mr. Toews and Dr. Émile Durkehim (1857-1917), the latter whom is credited with founding the academic discipline of sociology. The article “reports” that the Minister’s office cancelled the interview because Dr. Durkheim was alleged to have “committed sociology.”

Author Bernans explained the rationale behind publishing this piece of satire:

It made fun of the Harper government’s claim that “committing sociology” is some kind of terror-friendly crime. Public Safety Minister Vic Toews was the butt of the joke, but, strangely enough, it was Concordia University’s PR department that took offence.

Concordia’s Director of Media Relations Chris Mota informed CMM that the article defamed Concordia University, and ordered CMM to remove the article from its website within hours or face legal action.  CMM did not remove the original article, but published a redacted version of the article on May 3, 2013, removing any direct mention of Concordia and Émile Durkheim.

In April 2012, tuition hike protesters hijacked an event where the University community was supposed to meet the potential new president, Alan Shepard.  After students began chanting and using a megaphone to send the message that they would continue to disrupt the school year in this manner, the event was cancelled and Shepard never had the chance to speak.  The University allowed the protesters to silence the speaker and prevented other students and staff from meeting Mr. Shepard.

In 2004 a Jewish students’ group, Concordia Hillel, invited former Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Barak to speak at Concordia.  For fear of a security problem, Concordia refused to let Barak speak on campus, and proposed that Concordia Hillel co-sponsor an event at an alternative venue where Barak could speak.  A risk assessment team informed the University that it did not believe Concordia was equipped to secure an on-campus presentation from the former Israeli Prime Minister.  The university’s decision to move the event off-campus and not provide adequate security was criticized as a failure to protect free speech on campus; providing adequate security is as necessary a role as the upholding of free speech rights.

In its defence, Concordia stated:

Concordia University's decision not to host on our campuses the proposed speech by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, but to instead co-sponsor the event at a more securable location, has been distorted as a failure to protect free speech and a caving in to mob rule. This is simply not true.

The university has a responsibility to protect the security of students, staff, professors and neighbours while promoting free speech - at a location that security experts consider appropriate. This is precisely what we have done. That the organizers of Mr. Barak's proposed visit have rejected our offer to facilitate, co-sponsor and help pay for the event at one of several recommended Montreal sites calls into question whether they truly wish to hear Mr. Barak's views or, rather, wish to advance their own political agenda without regard for the potential consequences for Concordia University.

…However, it would have been negligent for the university to respond to such pressure by attempting to host the event on campus against responsible advice. Nor is it necessary. The facts are that Jewish students, professors and staff as well as members of many other ethnic and religious groups interact daily in complete freedom. Only yesterday, a distinguished Jewish scholar from Princeton University spoke to an overflow audience on the history of Jewish-Muslim relations. The lecture and an extended question period took place in an atmosphere of respect and civility.

In summary, we would have been pleased to have Mr. Barak speak to our students, and were prepared to plan for this until our risk assessment team, armed with advice from security authorities, concluded that we do not at present have a locale on campus that can reasonably be made sufficiently secure for such an event. That is why we made the offer to co-sponsor this speech off campus. Unfortunately, this offer was rejected.

Concordia provided no details or specific explanation for its assertion that no campus spaces were available.

On September 9, 2002, current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was to present a lecture at Concordia University.  His speaking event was cancelled when protesters and Montreal police began to clash outside the Henry F. Hall building, where the lecture was scheduled to take place.  Just before the event was scheduled to begin, protesters shattered a window in the lecture hall and police responded by throwing pepper spray into the crowd, which forced the evacuation of the building and the cancellation of the lecture.

In March 1992, artist Lyne Robichaud was invited to display her paintings at Concordia University’s Women’s Centre.  Organizers of the exhibition decided to ban some of her paintings that featured women of colour carrying fruit on their heads.  Organizers at the Women’s Centre justified the ban, expressing that as a white woman Robichaud should not be painting black women at all, let alone in “stereotypical” “Chiquita Banana” poses.  Robichaud, believing the ban to be absurd, noted that by the same logic “only men should paint men and only women should paint women.”

Student union policies

The Concordia Student Union’s (CSU) mission statement reads:

We are primarily driven by values of community, inclusivity, and sustainability. Contrary to mainstream discourse, students have proven to be a powerful force to be reckoned with, as well as a group that has historically inspired important social change. Student defiance and risk-taking in the past has made many of the rights we take for granted today possible. We maintain a strong focus on fighting the mounting climate crisis, racism, xenophobia, misogyny, queerphobia, ableism, and all other forms of discrimination. By bringing students on board, we are working toward and [sic] more just and prosperous society for all.

According to the CSU Sexual Violence and Safer Spaces Policy:

The CSU is committed to ensuring a safer space at every event we organize. Everyone attending is asked to actively partake in creating a respectful environment through their words and actions. The goals of a safer space include: harm reduction, accessibility, safety, and a non-threatening environment free of violence/harassment. 

To maintain a safe space for all to participate, we have a collective responsibility to ensure that: 

1. Everyone’s physical and emotional boundaries are respected, including being free from all forms of discrimination and harassment. 
2. We speak thoughtfully and respectfully towards others, thinking about language that can exclude or harm (e.g. not assuming gender identities, background, sexual preference, etc.) 

CSU’s Standing Regulations, section 96, defines requirements for student organizations to be officially recognized as clubs by the CSU.  The criteria for registration require, among other things, that “[t]he objectives and activities of the group should be seen as attempting to contribute to the educational, recreational, social, or cultural values of the Student Union and the University.” It further states that club membership “must be open to all members of the Student Union, without restriction on the grounds of national origin, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or faculty of study.”

Section 5 of Chapter IV – Election and Referendum proceedings, found in the CSU Standing Regulations, is vague about what can cause a candidate to be disqualified in a student election:

320. Candidates shall campaign in accordance with the rules of fair play. Breaking the rules of fair play include, but are not limited to, breaching generally accepted community standards, libel, harassment, slander, general sabotage of the campaigns of other candidates, and misrepresentation of facts.

Chapter II of “Book XII – Final Provisions”, contained in the Standing Regulations, gives CSU Council broad powers to disregard any Regulations maintained in the document:

Any ordinary motion, resolution or regulation who derogates from the code can only be adopted with a clause stating that the motion operates regardless of the Code of Standing Regulations. The clause must state which article (s) are not to be applied towards the motion. Such motion requires a 2/3 majority vote and will cease to have effect 4 months following its approval.

In December of 2014, members of the CSU voted on a referendum question to endorse the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which aims to place economic pressure on Israel for perceived human rights violations.  The question read: “Do you approve of the CSU endorsing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel?”  The “yes” side garnered a slim majority of 1,276 votes. The overall turnout was 2,580. There are 35,000 registered undergraduates at Concordia who were eligible to vote.

The CSU publishes a Positions Book outlining the positions the CSU takes as an organization. Many positions fall outside the student association’s mandate, such as:

6. The CSU calls on Concordia University to formally adopt a “Sanctuary Campus” status by not collaborating with the Canadian Border Service Agency (CBSA), including but not limited to the sharing of any information on its current and past staff, faculty, and students, or allowing CBSA on its premises, in order to protect undocumented community members from threat of deportation. 

Student union practices

In October of 2004, in response to the cancelling of the Ehud Barack lecture by Concordia University officials (see Section 2), CSU posted the following statement to its website supporting free expression on campus:

The Concordia Student Union supports free speech. As such we would support a speech by Ehud Barak held o­n campus as long as it is not disruptive to the academic pursuits of students. It could be held in the hockey arena or FC Smith Auditorium (at a time when there are no classes). In addition, 75% of the seats would need to be saved for students, entry could not be restricted for any constituency group and there would need to be an open question period.

On December 2, 2002, the student group Concordia Hillel (Hillel) had its club status revoked by CSU council in response to a flyer that Hillel allegedly distributed at an information table providing information on a volunteer program with the Israel Defense Forces.  Hillel has denied any responsibility for the flyers in question, claiming they were placed on one of their tables without their knowledge or consent.  The motion required Hillel to issue a public apology for the flyers before it could be reinstated.  Despite the council chair ruling the motion Out of Order, the nine council members present at the meeting overturned his decision and passed the motion by 8 to 1.  A week later, council backtracked by stating Hillel could be reinstated if it would apologize and promise not to distribute offensive materials in the future, but Hillel refused.

On December 11, 2002, Hillel announced that it would sue the CSU and the University as co-parties, demanding full reinstatement of club status as well as damages for the violation of their constitutional freedoms.  On October 10, 2003, the Quebec Court of Appeal ruled against Hillel’s appeal on lifting the suspension of their lawsuit, which had been ordered by the Quebec Superior Court in May of 2003.

In the 2018–19 financial year,* Concordia University received $353,344,000 in taxpayer dollars in the form of government grants. These taxpayer funds accounted for 56.2% of their annual revenue.

*Concordia University did not make their 2019–20 financial statements available by the time of publication of the 2020 Campus Freedom Index.