We cannot advocate for academic freedom only when it suits us, at the forefront of the client. The unfortunate impression has emerged in recent days as the CAQ government refused to approve the appointment of Denise Helly, a researcher known for her work on systemic racism and Islamophobia, to the board of the National Institute of Scientific Research (INRS ) to ratify).
Published at 2:10 am. Updated at 6:00 am.
I write “unfortunate impression” because up until now that was the only thing we had to fall back on: an impression. No explanations. Everyone was lost in guesswork.
It's been a week since this stalled nomination story made headlines. Faced with the government's stubborn refusal to explain itself, teachers, unions, students and, of course, opposition parties concluded that it was political interference. Many took the opportunity to highlight the hypocrisy of this censorious government, the same one that championed academic freedom not long ago.
I was also preparing to join the concert of criticism when the office of Higher Education Minister Pascale Déry broke its silence. Here, for the first time, is the government's statement: “We had reservations about Ms. Helly's links to controversial preacher Adil Charkaoui, so we asked the institution to submit another application to us. »
It therefore has nothing to do with the nature of Denise Helly's work, assures Simon Savignac, the minister's press spokesman. He swears he has nothing to do with academic freedom. But of course that's debatable.
***
In November 2015, Denise Helly organized a symposium on Islamophobia attended by Adil Charkaoui, a Quebecer of Moroccan origin who years earlier was suspected by Canadian intelligence services of being a sympathizer of the terrorist group Al-Qaeda.
“There were about ten Muslim associations, including the Quebec Collective Against Islamophobia led by Adil Charkaoui,” Denise Helly told me in an interview Wednesday morning. “The conference was organized by four people, it was an international conference, we had great minds from Europe and America… I did my job, that's all! » She does not deny that Adil Charkaoui is “a provocateur”, but as a researcher she considered it relevant to give him the floor.
In my opinion, giving this character a voice is never a good idea, no matter the circumstances.
Just a few months before this symposium, La Presse revealed that the imam had preached to six young Quebecers who had gone to fight jihad in Syria. And his legal problems had been known for a dozen years.
Denise Helly argues that she did not have to discriminate against the preacher because there was no evidence of his jihadist connections. That's true, but it's also a bit short: the security certificate to which Adil Charkaoui was subject was revoked by the Federal Court in 2009 because the secret services refused to disclose their evidence for fear of jeopardizing the disclosure of their sources and investigative methods. The federal authorities always claimed that it was no more and no less a question of national security.
However, Denise Helly might be interested in the Imam's point of view without supporting him. “It's as if you were working as a journalist on the far right and someone asked you: Why did you go to the leader of La Meute?” That makes no sense! », she is outraged.
I see a connection with the “N-word” debate, which led the government to enact laws to protect academic freedom. At the time, much emphasis was placed on the idea that, without endorsing the use of this word, teachers should have the right to say it in class, for example to explain a concept or present a work.
Likewise, inviting someone to a symposium does not necessarily mean that we support everything they do or say. A researcher may wish to listen to what their subject of study has to say with complete academic freedom.
But there is more than this symposium. In the minister's office, we frowned when we learned that a few months later Adil Charkaoui had awarded Denise Helly a recognition award for her efforts in the fight against Islamophobia. The ceremony took place during an evening organized by the preacher, a “memorable event,” according to a press release dated April 11, 2016.
Certainly any organization can try to build some semblance of credibility by handing out medals here and there. The mistake is playing the game and accepting these false honorifics.
***
Accepting this award was therefore a misjudgment by Denise Helly. It remains to be seen whether this mistake was so serious that the government refused to confirm his appointment to the INRS board. And if this refusal violates the Law on Academic Freedom in Science, passed by the same government in June 2022.
Finally, university autonomy is a principle enshrined in this new law…
According to the Quebec Federation of University Professors (FQPPU), the confirmation of the election of INRS members should normally have been just a formality. Denise Helly had been elected by her colleagues, the ministry just had to put its stamp on her.
Simon Savignac answers: No, the government doesn't just rubber stamp it; The decision to accept an application or not remains with the Minister and he takes the review process seriously. “The government has a responsibility when it appoints administrators. »
Although the government very rarely rejects applications, it did not expect such an outcry. I think part of his problem is that he has been silent for a long time. Call it an excess of ministerial discretion.
“The speculative machine has gone into a tailspin, we are aware of that,” admits Simon Savignac.
We therefore now suspect that the government has excluded a professor whose areas of expertise do not fit the Coalition Avenir Québec's program. Denise Helly sees herself as a victim of “ideological profiling”.
If it were true, it would be extremely serious. But that's not the case – at least not if the government is to be believed. The only problem, he says, is Adil Charkaoui.
The imam is so controversial that Minister Pascale Déry undoubtedly wanted to prevent the appointment of Denise Helly from coming back to haunt her one day. However, in my view, the Minister should not have rejected this researcher's application based on an error of judgment that does not invalidate her entire career.