The establishment and fortification of pro-Palestinian encampments, often funded and organized by malign foreign groups and agents, has turned our Canadian universities, faculties, and students into pawns in a political and religious war using propaganda, terrorism and asymmetric warfare tactics to influence public opinion. These tactics are designed to propagate and incite hatred toward Jewish people, cause economic harm to Israel, and delegitimize the Jewish state's right to exist. This vicious campaign is a critical issue that has stirred significant debate about the legal limits of protest and the responsibilities of educational institutions.
Protesters argue that they are exercising rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, these rights are not without limits. Distinguished Canadian criminal lawyer Leo Adler has noted that Sections 1 and 2 of the Charter allow for limitations on these freedoms when they infringe on the rights and safety of others. This legal latitude empowers universities to act against encampments that foster antisemitism.
Universities must endeavour, using all available legitimate tools, including litigation, to protect the rights of all students while maintaining a safe and respectful environment. The encampments often cross the line from peaceful protest to promotion of hatred, discrimination, and violence against Jewish students and anyone who disagrees with what they promote. Since their emergence after the October 7 massacre in Israel, it has been clear that under the guise of protest, these encampments were controlled by individuals seeking to dictate which views and ideas were acceptable. This attempted control extends to what Canadian institutions can invest in, with whom or what they can have academic associations, and who can have freedom of movement within the campuses they occupy.
The encampments are not about mutual respect and exchange of ideas; instead, they are the negation of these academic values and are a symptom of a deeper issue: systemic antisemitism. Universities in recent decades have, in fact, fostered an antisemitic environment where hate speech against Jews and Israel has been allowed, encouraged and rewarded without any consequences. These encampments are a symptom of the underlying root cause of university conflict, which is the empowerment of bold and open antisemitic academics espousing anti-Israel and antisemitic sentiments. This translates into student and university community support for the radical, anti-Israel BDS ("Boycott, Divest, Sanction") movement, which the Canadian government has recognized as antisemitic.
The universities, despite their professed commitment to academic freedom and open discussion, have allowed this hate speech on campus and defended professors and faculty who sign letters and join in the BDS movement. Universities justify upholding academic freedom, allowing faculty to express their views and participate in activities, including protests, without fear of retribution, even if these views oppose the government's position. This protection stands as long as it does not interfere with their professional duties or violate university policies. However, the encampments and antisemitic incitement not only violate university policies on equality, discrimination, and harassment but also violate Canadian and provincial laws on hate speech, harassment, discrimination, violence, and antisemitism.
Canadian universities have several legal tools at their disposal to deal with these encampments. One effective measure has been the invocation of the Provincial Trespass to Premises Act. This standard legislative act allows property owners, including universities, to prohibit individuals from illegally entering or remaining on their premises.
The University of Calgary set a precedent by using this Act to swiftly dismantle an encampment on their campus. Police were contacted the same day 150 protesters started setting up an encampment on the south lawn of MacEwan Hall. The Calgary police chief confirmed these encampments were non-compliant with the law. Four arrests were made for trespassing, and none were current University of Calgary students or staff. This confirms the involvement from outside the University, a motif seen with other university encampments, including McGill University in Montreal. Police were willing to act to remove the protesters because they knew they had the support of the university and government leadership.
Different universities have handled encampments with varying degrees of efficiency. The Edmonton Police Service also enforced provincial trespassing laws against campus demonstrators who breached university policies. University of Alberta President Bill Flanagan cited fire hazards and the risk of violent clashes with counter-protesters as reasons for police involvement.
Ontario Superior Court Justice Markus Koehnen ruled in favour of the University of Toronto, granting an injunction to dismantle the illegal encampment. He emphasized that "Case law is clear that exercising freedom of expression is not a defence to trespass. The protesters' conduct is actually inconsistent with freedom of expression, and there is ample judicial authority that says people don't have the right to occupy property that doesn't belong to them." He also ruled that Charter Rights' defence of expression is subject to "reasonable limits."
The swift action of other Universities contrasts with McGill, which allowed the encampment to commit several egregious offences. One of the most shocking hate crimes occurred on the McGill campus, where protesters hung an effigy of Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, in Auschwitz concentration camp attire. This vile display intentionally used the Holocaust to degrade the dignity of Jewish people and delegitimize Israel. According to the Canadian Criminal Code on the promotion of antisemitism, Section 319 (2.1), anyone who condones the Holocaust publicly is guilty of an indictable offence.
Jewish students at McGill University were continually targeted, harassed and antagonized by teachers and students. Daily offensive antisemitic messages directed at Jewish students were written on the chalkboard in the Law School building atrium. Jamie, a student at McGill, recounts how Jewish students were run out of class: "A legal ethics professor made course content based around the Israel-Gaza war. Her TA was part of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR). When Jewish students expressed feeling uncomfortable having their work graded by the TA, the professor proceeded to ask "ethical questions" about what the students would do if they found out their TA was part of SPHR, to antagonize the Jewish students, who had to switch out of that class."
In another class that Jamie attended, the professor asked the students to write a paper on their background. "I wrote about being Jewish, and she gave me a very poor mark without any explanation and no justification for the mark. When I asked why, she led me to believe that it was because I am Jewish," he said, adding, "She was also one of the teachers who signed the SPHR letter." Jamie was the only Jew in the class.
Multiple professors have signed SPHR letters calling Israel an illegitimate state and Jewish people genociders. Where in the course curriculum syllabus does it say the students have to give their ethnic backgrounds and professors can bring their politics into the classroom? Where in University policies on mutual respect, harassment, and discrimination does it say professors can single out and ask Jewish students to identify their background, make statements to rattle them, and sign letters claiming Jews are genociders and that their homeland is illegitimate? These "academic freedoms" clearly interfere with their professional duties.
"On November 8th during the Law Student's Association general meeting, a female Law student displayed a crystal mah-jongg menorah with broken glass as an antisemitic protest. This imagery explicitly referenced Kristallnacht, or "the Night of Broken Glass," a brutal Nazi pogrom against Jews on November 9-10, 1938. The broken glass symbolized the shattered windows of Jewish-owned businesses, buildings, and synagogues during that horrific event. This student had previously harassed Jamie and claimed the Law Student Association endorsed this form of protest. Vandalizing a Menorah is a hate crime in Canada, according to Bill C-305. Furthermore, the students who voted "yes" on divestment during the Law Student's Association meeting told Jamie that McGill should expel him and all students with ties to Israel. Despite initial investigations, the University dismissed these incidents without penalties.
Canadian laws clearly provide a framework that allows universities to act against encampments and the fostering of antisemitism. The Canadian Criminal Code Sections 318 and 319 criminalize hate speech, explicitly making advocating or promoting genocide and public incitement of hatred, Section 320.1, an offence. Hence, to willfully promote hatred against any identifiable group by communicating statements in any public place is actionable. In contrast, U.S. laws on hate speech are generally more permissive, prioritizing freedom of speech under the Constitution's First Amendment.
This difference can make it easier for Canadian universities to dismantle encampments and prevent behaviours that cross the line from legitimate protest into hate speech and discrimination. Yet, despite these available legal tools, many universities have failed to confront antisemitism and hold faculty, staff, and students accountable for their actions. Jewish students are left in a precarious situation where they feel threatened, unsafe, and victimized on campuses across Canada. Educational institutions are subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 15, the Canadian Human Rights Act, and Provincial Anti-Discrimination Laws, which complement the Charter rights of every individual to equality before and under the law and to equal protection without discrimination.
Encampments have been dismantled, but this does little to protect Jewish students from the antisemitic professors and students they will encounter starting in September 2024. Universities and their faculty must be held accountable for breaching Canadian laws and university policies and guilty of failing to protect Jewish students. Holding universities, faculty, and student groups responsible for antisemitic actions is crucial, but presents significant challenges in court. Individuals who have violated specific laws must be identified to establish liability, and victims must come forward and be ready to testify.
Identifying them is difficult when dealing with large, unruly mobs where individuals are often masked. Faculty members who occupy positions of authority, such as professors, are often tenured, and participate under the guise of freedom of expression and association, often supporting the movement without making overtly incriminating statements. Chants of "intifada" and "from the river to the sea…" are clear calls for genocide, but their perpetrators smugly deny their true meaning.
Rabbi Alan Bright of the Shaare Zedek synagogue in Montreal recently expressed his outrage in an interview condemning the necessity for Jews to resort to legal action to compel universities to comply with existing laws. He emphasized that no other group in society would tolerate such treatment. Rabbi Bright's leadership and statements reflect a powerful stance against antisemitism, highlighting the unity and resilience of the Jewish community in the face of adversity. In his powerful declaration, Rabbi Bright stated, "The days of the Jews cowering to thuggery are over and will never happen again!" He also noted that there is always a silver lining in every cloud. The Jewish community, in fighting the wave of post-October 7th antisemitism, has experienced a level of unity not seen since the end of WWII. This newfound unity is something Rabbi Bright never imagined witnessing in his lifetime. Rabbi Bright urges the community to "Keep our heads up and fight back!"
