McGill moves to cut ties with student union after protest led to classroom blockades, vandalism
McGill University is looking to cut its contractual relationship with the Students' Society of McGill University (SSMU) after pro-Palestinian protests last week led to blocked access to classrooms and vandalism.
Either party is permitted to end the relationship with no fault assigned, provided that mediation is attempted beforehand, according to the memorandum of agreement (MOA), interim deputy provost Angela Campbell said in an email. The school will begin that mediation process, she added, which will last for two weeks. An official decision will be made public in June.
While the SSMU plays an important and historic role in representing undergraduate students at McGill, the SSMU's "leadership has been neither unanimous nor explicit in dissociating itself from or rejecting groups without recognized status at McGill that endorse or engage in acts of vandalism, intimidation and obstruction as forms of activism," the email states.
"We reject this, unequivocally. Protest is indeed part of university life — our policies and the law protect peaceful assembly and freedom of expression," Campbell said. "But vandalism, obstruction, threats and violence do not fall within these protections."
The letter states that last week, SSMU allowed and, "at least tacitly," supported a three-day strike that led to dozens of classes being blocked or interrupted. Campbell cites one incident where individuals smashed a glass office door with a fire extinguisher filled with red paint. The paint was sprayed throughout the office and one staff member was hit directly, she says.
"No one at McGill … should ever have to experience this at their place of work or study," Campbell said.
The protest occurred during a three-day student strike over the university's investments linked to Israel. According to the SSMU, about 4,000 students participated in a referendum and the strike motion passed with 72 per cent support.
SSMU has no way to enforce rules, president says
Dymetri Taylor, SSMU president, said this decision comes on the heels of a student strike that overall stayed within the procedures, guidelines and bylaws in place. As for the actions that went too far, such as the incident with the paint, he said the SSMU did not encourage those behaviours.
"We strictly said at the beginning that students were expected to follow the code of student conduct — that it was a voluntary strike. We can't mandate anyone to participate if they don't want to," Taylor said.
"Blockading classrooms gets out of the voluntary aspect there."
He said the co-ordinated events fell within the guidelines, but some groups did their own thing. The SSMU doesn't have a way to enforce the rules, he said.
It's up to the school to enforce them. The SSMU can't hire security to stop certain behaviours, he said.
Barry Eidlin, an associate professor of sociology at McGill, supports the student union. He's also a labour expert, and said student associations like the SSMU aren't just another academic club or student advocacy group in Quebec. Comparing them to a labour union, he said they have more structure and representation in the province.
He sharply criticized the McGill administration for cutting ties with the SSMU, calling it an "astonishing violation of student freedom of speech and freedom of assembly."
He accused the university of taking steps to limit student freedom of expression on campus by determining which issues students are allowed to speak up about.
Lawyer says SSMU will remain accredited
Patrice Blais, a lawyer who specializes in non-profit law and accrediting student unions, also compared the SSMU to a labour union. They receive accreditation from Quebec's Ministry of Higher Education, giving them certain powers and rights such as appointing representatives and having office space.
He said the MOA is a contract that goes further than the accreditation, determining how the relationship with the university will work — including fees, office space and activities. There are ways to terminate or renegotiate the contract, Blais said, but when McGill says it will terminate the agreement, the SSMU still retains provincial accreditation.
"In no way will it be able to remove the rights under the accreditation act," said Blais. "It's not like McGill could defund the student union tomorrow. That would be against the law."
That means the SSMU still gets office space and its appointments to various student bodies must be recognized, Blais said. When it comes to terminating the MOA, he can't say exactly what will be affected because he hasn't seen the contract.
"But I think it's going to change very little overall," said Blais.
Students for Palestine's Honour and Resistance (SPHR) voiced its support for the SSMU in a statement, saying "the student body has never been more united and galvanized for Palestine, and that is precisely why the administration is insistent on penalizing everyone for a democratic strike instead of simply divesting."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
5 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Judge says government must release Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil
A federal judge has ruled that the government must release Mahmoud Khalil, the former Columbia University graduate student whom the Trump administration is trying to deport over his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Khalil, a legal U.S. resident, was detained by federal immigration agents on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment, the first arrest under President Donald Trump's crackdown on students who joined campus protests against the war in Gaza.
Winnipeg Free Press
6 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Judge says government must release Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil
NEWARK, N.J. (AP) — A federal judge has ruled that the government cannot deport and must release Mahmoud Khalil, the student whom the Trump administration jailed over his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations at Columbia University. Khalil was detained by federal immigration agents on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment in New York. He was then flown across the country and taken to an immigration detention center in Jena, Louisiana. Khalil's lawyers have challenged the legality of his detention. They say the Trump administration is trying to crack down on free speech. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio says he has the power to deport Khalil because his presence in the U.S. could harm foreign policy. U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz had ruled earlier that expelling Khalil from the U.S. on those grounds was likely unconstitutional. In a new ruling Wednesday, the judge said that Khalil had shown that his continued detention is causing irreparable harm to his career, his family and his free speech rights. Farbiarz gave the government until Friday to appeal the decision. He also required Khalil to post a $1 bond.
Montreal Gazette
6 hours ago
- Montreal Gazette
Hanes: It seems the courts can only do so much to protect English institutions from overreach
By Shock waves rippled across the globe last month when U.S. President Donald Trump slapped a ban on international students at Harvard University, part of his escalating war against America's oldest institution of higher learning. Harvard fought back and the courts granted a reprieve to 6,700 international students attending one of the world's most prestigious universities, including 700 Canadians. But it's clear Trump has it out for Harvard in particular as he seeks to remould American universities to prevent them from spreading supposedly 'woke,' leftist ideology and challenging his administration's undercutting of democracy. He has withdrawn billions in grants and research funding, arrested international students or revoked their visas, threatened universities' tax status, and interfered with diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. It's a terrifying blow to academic freedom — an attack intended to weaken a powerful institution, driven by political motives and petty resentments. Closer to home, it's hard not to notice parallels with how Premier François Legault has been treating Quebec's English universities. His efforts to hobble them started well before Trump returned to office and his methods are more subtle. But some of the consequences are similar. In 2023, his government without warning announced the doubling of tuition for out-of-province students, a move disproportionately affecting McGill, Concordia and Bishop's universities. While the amount was eventually lowered to 33 per cent and Bishop's got a partial exemption, English schools were later told they had to ensure 80 per cent of their graduates attain an intermediate level of French to graduate. The government also said it would claw back a portion of international student tuition from English universities and redistribute it to francophone institutions. The stated objective of these punitive measures was to protect French. Government ministers blamed English-speaking university students from other provinces for anglicizing downtown Montreal while also lamenting they leave Quebec after they come here to study, instead of integrating and paying taxes. The fee increase seemed intended to make students from the rest of Canada feel unwelcome — and knock the English schools, McGill in particular, down a few pegs. Business leaders, most French university rectors, Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante, academics, student groups and an advisory committee reporting to Higher Education Minister Pascale Déry all denounced the tuition hike, warning it would hurt the economy, academia, scientific research and the vitality of the higher education ecosystem. It went ahead anyway. McGill and Concordia launched a legal challenge while their revenues, recruitment and reputations suffered. In April, Quebec Superior Court overturned the tuition fee increase and the onerous French requirements for out-of-province students, calling them 'unreasonable.' This week, Déry's office announced the Quebec government won't appeal the judgment that used words like 'unfounded,' 'fuzzy,' 'erroneous' and 'incoherence' to describe the factual basis (or lack thereof) justifying the manoeuvres. Yet instead of emerging chastened, the Legault government has been emboldened. Déry's office confirmed she intends to double down on the tuition increase while also emphasizing that Quebec is under no obligation to guarantee students from outside the province access to its universities. Time will tell what the latter chilling statement really means. But in the current context, it sounds ominous for McGill and Concordia. What looked like a partial win may end up amounting to pyrrhic victory. Or maybe more like Groundhog Day. The Legault government may simply plan to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to do what it intended in the first place, this time in a way that passes legal muster. It's making a generous interpretation of the judgment — taking it as constructive criticism rather than a stern rebuke. Quebec Superior Court Justice Éric Dufour struck down the tuition hike and French requirements, but he mainly found fault with 'poverty of evidence' and contradictory arguments for failing the test of 'reasonableness.' 'It's true that discretionary power warrants a lot of room to manoeuvre and that the court must grant the minister all the latitude to act. Restraint is required when it comes to decisions based on political choices,' Dufour wrote. 'But as important as discretion is, the minister must nevertheless demonstrate that it's being exercised in a reasonable manner, that's to say in this instance, with respect to existent and founded facts.' It's a ruling largely based on administrative principles. The judge steered clear of bigger questions pertaining to rights that were raised in the case because the technical flaws made them moot to the ultimate outcome. These include McGill's argument that the tuition hike for students from other provinces violated its equality rights on the basis of language. Since the judge left these matters unanswered, perhaps this will give the universities recourse in the future. Because the fight seems destined to continue with a government that has a track record of trying to diminish English institutions, be they school boards, colleges, hospitals or universities. The battle may even ramp up if the government looks to meddle in the composition of the student bodies. All Quebec universities are reeling from a drop in enrolment from international students because of changes to both federal and provincial policy. Their higher tuition helps make up for government underfunding and is essential to conducting scientific research. The crackdown on international students may be part of a Canada-wide plan to rein in the surging number of temporary immigrants, which has contributed to the housing crisis. But in Quebec, it's also part of a broader effort to reduce immigration for the purposes of protecting the French language and culture. Legault has made it no secret that he considers anglophone students from the rest of Canada a threat to French, too. The use of the word 'access' by Déry's office with regards to students from other provinces suggests a toughening of Quebec's stand and a sharpening of previous complaints about Quebecers having to 'subsidize' the education of young people from the rest of Canada. This portends ill for McGill and Concordia's efforts to attract the best and the brightest, since many of their students come from elsewhere in the country. It appears the courts can only do so much to protect English institutions from political leaders who read encouragement into rulings that should leave them embarrassed, and who have no qualms about trampling constitutional rights to achieve their aims, invoking the notwithstanding clause to shield laws that otherwise would be struck down. It gives new meaning to the slogan on the novelty T-shirts often sold near the Roddick Gates during frosh week: 'Harvard: America's McGill.'
