A call for institutional neutrality
A letter to all UK Universities from the London Universities’ Council for Academic Freedom, Alumni for Free Speech, Academics For Academic Freedom, Committee for Academic Freedom, Pharos Foundation, Student Academics For Academic Freedom, Best Free Speech Practice and the other campaigners named below
16 April 2025
Dear University Leaders,
Institutional neutrality at your university: a key to risk reduction
We are writing, as campaigners for free speech and academic freedom, to urge your institution to adopt a policy of institutional neutrality on social and political issues that do not directly concern core academic matters or institutional operations.
In recent years, universities have increasingly taken official stances on contentious social and political issues. This trend has contributed to the politicisation of higher education and created an untenable expectation that universities must weigh in on every major political or social debate. Most critically, such institutional positions risk establishing an orthodox view on campus, thereby threatening the pursuit of truth and knowledge—the very purpose for which universities exist.
When a university takes sides on a controversial issue, it necessarily formally sets itself against the other position. This creates a chilling effect on people who hold that other viewpoint, and also fosters an environment where attacking people for their viewpoints becomes acceptable. To ensure that all members of the academic community feel free to express their ideas without fear of repercussion, universities must remain neutral on matters of polarising public debate.
As the Kalven report from the University of Chicago eloquently states:
The university is the home and sponsor of critics; it is not itself the critic. It is, to go back once again to the classic phrase, a community of scholars. To perform its mission in the society, a university must sustain an extraordinary environment of freedom of inquiry and maintain an independence from political fashions, passions, and pressures. A university, if it is to be true to its faith in intellectual inquiry, must embrace, be hospitable to, and encourage the widest diversity of views within its own community. It is a community but only for the limited, albeit great, purposes of teaching and research. It is not a club, it is not a trade association, it is not a lobby.
The same report argues that the neutrality of the university arises not from a lack of courage nor out of indifference and insensitivity. It arises out of respect for free inquiry and the obligation to cherish a diversity of viewpoints.
What institutional neutrality entails
A commitment to institutional neutrality means that universities should formally adopt a statement of neutrality in their governing documents or core policies, as many institutions worldwide have already done, and should refrain from:
- Adopting or enforcing particular political, social or ideological viewpoints or agendas (Relevant Agendas) unless they are legally required of them or directly affect their core functions.
- Issuing official statements on political, social, cultural, religious and moral issues that do not directly affect their core functions or institutional operations.
- Requiring or pressuring staff or students to promote or support particular Relevant Agendas, unless legally required of them.
- Adopting political symbols or flying flags that signal alignment with specific political or social movements.
- Endorsing or affiliating with external organisations promoting particular Relevant Agendas, except as legally required of them.
For these purposes, the core functions of a university comprise education, research, and the pursuit of its charitable objects as defined in its charter. The above principles apply to the university and its component parts and to any person or body authorised or purporting to speak on behalf of the university or any of its component parts.
In sum: institutional neutrality means that if a higher education institution is not required to adopt a position in order to fulfil its mission of education and research, it is required not to adopt a position. However, institutional neutrality does not:
- Restrict individual academics, including those in senior positions, from expressing their own views on social and political issues—provided they do not do so on behalf of the institution.
- Mean neutrality on the university’s fundamental commitment to free inquiry.
- Stop universities from stating a position on issues directly relevant to institutional operations (including financial decisions).
It simply ensures that the university itself, as an institution, does not take sides on the contested political and moral issues of the day that do not directly affect its core functions, precisely in order to make space for scholars and students to weigh in on those issues as individuals.
We do not seek to prescribe the precise wording of an institutional neutrality policy. In the appendix to the full letter, we included some examples from other universities that have adopted such policies.
The global trend toward institutional neutrality
A growing number of universities worldwide have adopted institutional neutrality policies. In the United States, over 140 universities have formally committed to such policies. In the UK, institutions such as Queen Mary University of London and Imperial College London have formally embraced neutrality as a safeguard for academic freedom. By doing so, they affirm their commitment to open debate, intellectual diversity, and the unfettered pursuit of knowledge. They also protect themselves from accusations of political bias and reduce external pressures to take positions on complex political issues.
Legal considerations: neutrality is necessary to reduce legal risks
Beyond fostering pluralism and academic freedom, institutional neutrality offers one of the most effective ways to limit legal risks under existing legislation and regulatory requirements protecting freedom of speech and belief, in particular under:
- The Equality Act 2010, which protects against discrimination and harassment based on belief and other protected characteristics.
- The Education (No. 2) Act 1986 (Section 43), which mandates universities to secure free speech, and which will shortly be replaced and expanded pursuant to the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 (HEFSA), which strengthens protections for speech on campus—introducing much-needed accountability and a new legal duty to promote the importance of freedom of speech.
- The Human Rights Act 1998, which safeguards freedom of expression.
Several now well-known free speech controversies have reportedly cost the universities involved upwards of £1 million each.
Further, universities are required by their conditions of registration to have governing documents that uphold (and to have in place adequate and effective management and governance arrangements to deliver in practice) the public interest governance principles relating to securing freedom of speech and academic freedom. The Office for Students has recently fined the University of Sussex £585,000 for compliance failures caused by uncritically adopting a template provided by an external provider. Had Sussex remained neutral on what is a contested subject, it would have been much more likely to have ensured that its policy was compliant with its registration conditions, and it would have avoided this fine and accompanying reputational damage.
Institutional neutrality is the only effective way of minimising legal risks (see Appendix 2 of the full letter).
A call to action
To ensure clarity and preparedness in implementing an institutional neutrality policy, we urge you and your university’s governing body to publicly commit to such a policy by the beginning of the 2025-26 academic year.
By doing so, your institution will not only protect its core mission of education and research but also demonstrate leadership in upholding the principles of free inquiry, academic freedom, and intellectual diversity. It will also be taking important steps to minimise risks of compliance failures.
We look forward to your response and to seeing your institution take a principled stand in favour of open and fearless intellectual engagement.
Yours faithfully,
Professor Abhishek Saha (QMUL), Professor Ian Pace (City St George’s), Professor Alice Sullivan (UCL), Professor Lucinda Platt (LSE), Professor Stephen Warren (ICL), Dr John Armstrong (KCL) and Michelle Shipworth (UCL), Founder Members of the London Universities’ Council for Academic Freedom
William Mackesy and Andrew Neish KC, Founders, Alumni for Free Speech
Professor Dennis Hayes, Director, Academics For Academic Freedom
Dr Edward Skidelsky, Director, the Committee for Academic Freedom
Professor David Abulafia CBE FBA, University of Cambridge, President, Pharos Foundation
Jaiden Long, Convenor, Student Academics For Academic Freedom
Andrew Neish KC and William Mackesy, Founders, Best Free Speech Practice
Professor Peter Ramsay, Co-Chair, LSE Academic Freedom
***
The Rt Hon. Lord Biggar of Castle Douglas, CBE
Lord Young of Acton
Sir Niall Ferguson, Milbank Family Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford; Founding Trustee, University of Austin; Visiting Professor, London School of Economics
David Palfreyman OBE, Fellow, New College Oxford, co-author of ‘The Law of Higher Education’
Professor Jo Phoenix, Professor of Criminology, School of Law, University of Reading
Professor John Marenbon FBA, Senior Research Fellow, Trinity College, University of Cambridge
Professor Steven Greer, Emeritus Professor, University of Bristol Law School; Research Director, Oxford Institute for British Islam
Professor Doug Stokes, Professor in International Security and Strategy, Exeter University
Dr James Orr, Associate Professor of Philosophy of Religion, University of Cambridge
Dr Michael Biggs, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Oxford
(NB This is an edited verson of the longer letter. The full text is available on the Best Free Speech Pactice website)
Photo Credit: Public Domain University of Chicago – srping on campus.
