Academic Freedom Policy and Procedure

3.2.1 Freedom of Inquiry and Expression
Staff and students may inquire, explore and communicate ideas, even those that offend or shock, subject only to lawful, reasonable and proportionate limitations (Model Code cl 5) such as safety, confidentiality, or compliance with statute.

3.2.2 Respect for Others
Exercise of freedom must not constitute unlawful harassment, intimidation or discrimination (see Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic) and federal anti-discrimination statutes).

3.2.3 Support for Vulnerable Groups
The Institute recognises its responsibility to protect vulnerable persons from harm, including from speech or conduct that constitutes unlawful harassment, vilification, or discrimination. All staff, students, and visitors are expected to exercise their freedoms in a manner that upholds the dignity and safety of all members of the Institute community, with particular regard to those who may be at increased risk of harm.

3.2.4 Freedom in Teaching
Academic staff determine teaching content and methods, provided they meet professional standards, accreditation requirements (TEQSA Threshold Standards 2021) and the Institute’s educational objectives.

3.2.5 Responsibility and Integrity in Research
Researchers must follow ethical and legal norms, including the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2023), obtaining approvals and disclosing conflicts.

3.2.6 Public Engagement and External Speakers
As a private, not-for-profit higher-education provider, the Institute welcomes vigorous public discussion while retaining the right—and responsibility—to manage access to its premises and digital platforms in a way that upholds its vision, values and legal obligations.

3.2.7 Booking and Information Requirements

3.2.7.1 All events involving a visiting speaker (invited or external) must comply with the Institute’s room-booking or webinar-hosting procedures.

3.2.7.2  Organisers must supply information the Institute reasonably requires to assess security, safety, logistics and alignment with our mission.

3.2.8 Distinction between Invited and External Visitors

3.2.8.1 Invited visitors are sponsored by a staff member, student group, or Institute unit.

3.2.8.2 External visitors have no such sponsorship and may be subject to additional conditions (e.g., vetting of promotional materials).

3.2.9 Grounds for Refusal or Conditional Approval
The Institute may refuse permission—or attach reasonable, proportionate conditions—only where the proposed speech is likely to:

3.2.9.1 be unlawful (e.g. defamation, vilification, incitement to violence);

3.2.9.2 seriously prejudice the Institute’s duty to foster the wellbeing and safety of staff or students;

3.2.9.3 advance claims purporting to be scholarly but falling so far below academic standards as to undermine the Institute’s character as a centre of learning.

3.2.9.4 The Institute may also require organisers to contribute to security or other costs necessary to ensure public safety and order.

3.2.10 Content Neutrality

Subject to the criteria above, the Institute will not refuse permission—nor impose additional conditions—solely because it disagrees with, or anticipates controversy about, the content of a visitor’s proposed speech, provided that the content does not contravene any applicable law or the Institute’s core policies (including those related to safety, anti-discrimination, and respect

3.2.11 Obligations of Organisers and Speakers

3.2.11.1 Speakers must comply with lawful directions, venue conditions, and time allocations.

3.2.11.2 Organisers must ensure events occur in a manner consistent with the Institute’s values of inclusivity, compassionate engagement, and evidence-driven practice.

3.2.12 Institutional Responsibility
The Institute may regulate expression only where it is:

3.2.12.1 unlawful (e.g., hate speech contravening Criminal Code Act 1995); or

3.2.12.2 reasonable and proportionate to protect safety, legal obligations or the rights of others. Any such regulation must be no more extensive than necessary (Model Code cl 5).

3.2.12.3 Presumption of Academic Freedom – and Lawful, Proportionate Limitations
The Institute upholds a strong presumption in favour of academic freedom and lawful freedom of speech.  These freedoms may be restricted only when, and only to the extent that, a lawful, reasonable, and proportionate limitation is required to achieve a legitimate objective. In assessing proportionality, the Institute will take into account its mission, values, and regulatory obligations.

Legitimate Objective	Examples of Lawful, Proportionate Limitations	Alignment with Institute Values
a. Compliance with Australian law	Prohibiting speech that is defamatory (Defamation Act 2005), vilifying (Racial Discrimination Act 1975; Sex Discrimination Act 1984), or incites violence (Criminal Code Act 1995).	Upholds integrity and compassionate engagement.
b. Protection of wellbeing and safety	Imposing security conditions or denying a venue if credible threats to staff or students are identified.	Aligns with our duty of care, inclusivity, and TEQSA Standard 2.3 (Wellbeing & Safety).
c. Maintenance of professional and ethical standards	Requiring research ethics approval; refusing to endorse pseudoscientific claims that fall grossly below scholarly standards.	Ensures evidence-driven practice and professional integrity.
d. Respect for resource constraints	Reasonable limits on use of facilities, funding or staff time, provided such limits do not unduly restrict core academic activity.	Balances scholarly freedom with responsible stewardship.

 

3.2.13 Proportionality Test
Before any restriction is imposed, the Institute will ensure that it is:

3.2.13.1 Lawful – grounded in a specific legal duty or contractual obligation.

3.2.13.2 Necessary – no less-restrictive measure would achieve the same objective.

3.2.13.3 Proportionate – the benefit of the restriction outweighs the impairment to freedom.

3.2.13.4 Transparent – reasons are recorded and, where appropriate, communicated to those affected, with a right to internal review.