The Perspective
Atlanta, Georgia
February 24 2019

Introduction

These days in Liberia, everybody is a constitutional lawyer. No longer can any public or private discussion be held wherein one or two persons do not claim constitutional violation. Presidential appointments  to tenured positions, the ongoing legal wrangling over the impeachment trial of a sitting supreme court justice, and the recent suspension of student campus politics at the University of Liberia have all yielded shouts of constitutional violation. It is now as if Liberians have awakened from years of political slumber and found a new niche in freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. And in the name of constitutionally-protected freedom of expression, no topics are any longer off-limits in Liberian society, as every topic is now fair game for public discussion, whether personal or otherwise. Hence, news of the suspension on January 11, 2019, of political activities at the country’s oldest public university was greeted by heated debates on radio talk shows and social media; in newspapers; and among college professors, street vendors, politicians, and student groups. Many social media enthusiasts, newspaper article respondents, and talk show participants even indulged in the speculations that the University administration imposed the suspension not on its own merit but by the directives of higher-ups in the ruling national party. But does a University administration need outside intervention in order to discipline students, faculty, and staff of the university for cause?

The answer to this question is the main crux of the matter at hand. Two competing student political groups clashed on the University’s Capitol Hill Campus prior to the suspension.  The University Administration, citing Rules 9,10, 11 of the Students Handbook, suspended all campus-based student political activities (including political/solidarity marches, political gatherings, the wearing of symbols and emblems depicting and promoting campus-based political groups, and student protests) for time indefinite, and warned that violators “shall be expelled” (Kwanue). These speculations raised additional questions such as 1) What does the University’s Students Handbook say about student politics and clashes by rival student political groups on campus? and 2) What aspect of the suspension of student politics on a university campus constitutes constitutional violation? I shall address these concerns in these narratives, with emphasis on the rights and responsibilities of University students and administrators, and the general requirements for campus politics at higher education institutions.

Free Speech and Free Assembly

The 1986 Liberian constitution upholds freedom of speech and freedom of peaceful and orderly assembly for all citizens and residents of Liberia, but not without limitations. Article 15(a) imposes individual responsibility for whatever claims made in the exercise of free expression, while Article 15(b) provides an academic freedom doctrine that protects the very act of giving and receiving knowledge. Article 17 provides not only the right of individuals to peaceful and orderly assemble, but also the right to accept or refuse to associate with political parties, trade unions, and other organizations. Article 15(b)  also provides for individual rights to educational pursuits,  but it doesn’t state “how” and to what extent knowledge can be given and acquired, “by whom,” and “at what level. “ It doesn’t state if knowledge can be impacted through a structured or unstructured system, and if a structured system, who may be qualified and accepted as students, faculty, staff, or administrators? It doesn’t state what processes, procedures, and requirements are needed for the acceptance and retention of students, faculty, staff, or administrators in a particular higher education institution. These omissions are often best settled by relevant state and federal statutes and related administrative laws, which are usually relied upon by University administrations in formulating policies for the general governance of the University.

In essence, the Liberian constitution and the administrative governance structures and purposes of universities do not give carte blanche permit to any student, faculty, staff, or administrator of a university to engage in political activities on a university campus outside of a  disciplinary focus or practicum. For the exchange of knowledge requires more than an individual’s right to education: it requires a set of administrative structures that bind students, faculty, and administrators together in a social contract that spells out the policies for student registration, academic programs and associated curricula, academic probation, system of grading and awarding of grades, use of campus facilities, and the establishment, role , and leadership requirements of  student clubs and sororities on campus.

Writing  in The Perspective on 29 January 2019 in reaction to the suspension, fellow educator and a former University of Liberia assistant professor and department chair, Abdoulaye W. Dukulé, PhD raised the stakes in the discussion  by the declarations that 1) Students are not accountable to the university authorities about their political views; 2) University students “are not children who need to be taught how to and when to speak”; 3) Politics on a university campus is national politics; and 4) It is an illusion to stop students from engaging in politics” on campus. He also described the suspension as  “counterproductive” to the students developing the requisite leadership skills for future leadership roles in Liberian society, and as “against the freedom of speech and freedom of association enshrined in the Constitution”  (Dukulé).

The readers can decipher the truth from the fancy in Dukulé’s claims. After all, the Liberian constitution gives each of us “The right to hold opinions without interference and the right to knowledge” (Article 15(b)).  However, I do not see the suspension as violation of the free expression and free assembly rights of the students.  I do not remotely believe that only children can be taught how and when to speak, nor do I believe that any groups of students, faculty, or staff can lawfully engage in any activity on a university campus outside specific university guidelines, policies, and approval processes. I do know that public speaking and oral presentation skills are as essential to the growth and development of the capacities of university students as the academic programs and curricula that undergird their academic pursuits. I also know that it is not against the norms of university governance for a University administration to abolish, suspend, or cancel particular university programs and campus activities.

For instance, in The Aims of Education and Other Essays, educator Alfred North Whitehead tells us that “The justification for a university is that it preserves the connection between knowledge and the zest of life, by uniting the young and the old in the imaginative consideration of learning” (93).  The key point here is that if a university must maintain the connection between individual zest of life and knowledge, then it stands to reason that both the old and the young people participating in learning at the university level must proceed with caution, care, and unity of purpose and not antagonism. For knowledge, it appears, must be impacted and acquired within a quiet and peaceful atmosphere and not within a noisy and chaotic atmosphere. this is why, regardless of what the political, religious, or philosophical persuasions of a student, faculty, or administrator might be, administrators of universities and other higher education institutions always have primary responsibility for creating a conducive learning environment that gives equal access, opportunity, and protection to all categories of students. To this end, many universities will not allow any visitor, student, faculty, staff, or administrator on campus without proper identification and security check.

All educators should know that University administrations generally recognize the educational benefits to be accrued to the university, the community, and the country when students are exposed to political debate and information, including partisan political activities on campus. However, in handling student partisan political activities  on campus University administrations are mostly concerned with maintaining an orderly and peaceful learning environment at all times, in strict compliance with university rules, regulations, and procedures, and avoidance of any activities that will bring into disrepute the mission, vision, and core values of the university. Hence, the issues of individual free speech and peaceful assembly in no way abrogate the functions of college and university administrators and the expectations that persons designated as students must meet.

There should, therefore, not be any need to reinvent the wheels on university governance in the face of the recent University suspension order by resorting to the kind of provocative language that led us as a nation and people to the abyss of self-destruction in our recent past. For while it may make political sense to try to  move the discussion away from what  actually transpired on the University campus to warrant the suspension  to purposeful  yearnings for individual  bravado, political intrigues, and public relations stunts, the focus should instead be on restructuring university education in Liberia to prepare students not for active roles as opposition politicians, but to prepare for future leadership roles students who are highly motivated people and have the knack for scholarship, discovery, development, and progress.

Example of University Policy on Use of Campus Facilities for political purposes

Every University administration has a duty to safeguard the image of the university by making sure that all campus activities are in line with the mission, vision, and core values of the university. As a result, University administrations are directly and indirectly responsible for any and all activities and programs on campus, including public statements of a political nature. Hence, student partisan politics on a university campus is not a matter of constitutional right but a “privilege” that can be revoked at any time based on the administrative prerogatives of University administrations. For instance, in a research study and publication on student politics and activism in Africa, it is found that the impetus for student governments and related student political activities on university campuses is to provide a platform for student representation in university governance.

The study, however, found that “In Kenya, Nigeria and in private universities in Uganda, candidates for student representatives [on university councils and boards of trustees] are vetted by university officials [and] In Ethiopia, student representatives are appointed by university officials rather than being subject to the democratic election process from the student body” (Klemenčič et al. 20). Indeed,  it goes without saying that while an individual student, faculty, or staff of a university may have the right to make a political speech, that political speech, once made on the campus of the university, is subject to the administrative purview of the University administration. In other words,  University administrations  don’t want to be wrongly and unfairly associated with the unapproved acts of students and faculty on campus, in the same way none of us as individuals persons would want  in our private lives to be aligned with or held accountable for the hate speech or treasonable actions of guests in our homes. 

Consequently, the key concern of almost every University administration around the world has always been how to avoid a negative or wrongful public perception about the University’s mission, vision, and core values. This is why many colleges and universities not only impose a term of use policy on-campus facilities but also make sure that requests for permission to use campus facilities are guided by the principle of viewpoint neutrality and evenhandedness. The following excerpts from the standing policy of the State University of New York System in the U.S.  provide a broader context as to whether or not students attending a particular university are not accountable to authorities of that university about their political views: