Photo retrieved from Matt Barter’s Twitter.
NOTE: This article covers a developing story as of Jan 17, further updates to follow.
This Sunday, student activist Matt Barter announced the release of his campus ban from Memorial University campus by the Student Conduct Office. This result comes nearly a month after Barter announced he had been forced to lawyer up, on December 15th. In response yesterday, Memorial University spoke out to clarify the matter, somewhat breaching its usual zero-comment policy to clarify.
As recent determinations deem Barter is no longer a threat to the campus, MUN has now decided to more aggressively downplay the severity of the “interim measures” (or “ban” in question) as external investigations take place. Previous administrative standards for a zero comment policy on individual cases required MUN to passive-aggressively describe Barter as “a student who believes they have been banned from campus“. Now that the determination has been made about the lack of threat Barter poses, MUN has attempted to elaborate retroactively.
It seems this public safety determination has been supported by broad public support for Barter. Whether temporary or not, Barter was at least banned from campus pending a still-ongoing investigation into his conduct- that much remains true. MUN’s statement does little to answer the public rage over why he was banned, to begin with (and why his protesting was interpreted as dangerous). In all likelihood it probably doesn’t satisfy Barter who was given a letter directly warning him that he was “hereby banned”:
(Original Letter of correspondence shared by Matt Barter)
Instead, MUN has since denied that Barter was ever given a “complete ban”, stating:
“The student was never under a complete ban from Memorial. Interim measures that were in place allowing him to attend classes and exams. There have not been any agreed upon modifications.”
Memorial University statement (via Saltwire)
However, Barter does not appear to have ever been given a timeline for any of the supposedly temporary measures and essentially required strict permission from the campus enforcement to attend lectures, labs, or medical services which he paid for. While this may not be a “complete ban”, it is difficult to say how it did not function as such given the unwelcoming process to permit access to campus despite tuition payments. Had Barter been a student activist living on campus, this “interim measure” could’ve led to an eviction. As a result, the would-be defendant is not likely anticipating an apology soon, as has been requested by MUNSU.
Before this recent development, a large amount of public outcry had been made in defence of Barter. In addition to backing by MUNSU, the ban concerned the academic community as the Society for Academic Freedom and Scholarship posted a letter about the state of academic freedom in addition to the order of removing resignation posters. Also raising their support for Barter were the local Communists of the Sally & Chuck Davis Club NL. It is difficult to remember a comparable instance where such unanimous support was generated around one cause. The not-ban drew criticism of academics, communists, student activists, Newfoundlanders (and Canadians outside the province), the MUNFA teacher’s union, and nearly landed the school in court. The fact remains that Barter was penalized (even in the short term) for exercising rights that appear to be supported by the community and code of conduct (at least for the time being).
While some may see this relinquished ban as a positive development, it remains to be seen whether this is just the first in a series of hurdles Barter and other student activists may face in the near future. Prior to COVID-19, mobilization for student protests and picketing were common throughout the year. As pointed out by Barter, during previous tenures student protests sometimes went as far as the occupation of administrators’ offices.
However, with COVID-19, many students have yet to be introduced to Memorial’s usual demonstrations held by MUNSU and other youth activist groups. The recent climate march in October was a rare exception to the trend, occurring during a time when COVID case rates were far lower than the current post-holiday fallout.
It’s unclear if similar complaints against activists like Barter will occur once Coronavirus regulations begin to relax. If other not-bans (similar to the one issued to Barter) aren’t issued to post-COVID activists, then it will speak volumes about what was attempted in trying to silence a lone activist while MUN thought nobody was watching. Regardless, the Barter case has had a strong impact on raising student consciousness and the importance of the right to protest amid a time when many have yet had the chance to participate. It has also drawn further national scrutiny to a struggling administration.