VIU student petitions BC Supreme Court for judicial review of suspension (cheknews.ca)

submitted 3 days ago by Sunshine@piefed.social to c/canada@lemmy.ca

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Sunshine@piefed.social 7 points 3 days ago

The genocide supporting administration of VIU:

https://adm.viu.ca/administration

[-] nyan@lemmy.cafe 1 points 2 days ago

It looks to me like she was practicing civil disobedience, or trying to. Civil disobedience has a long and honourable history, but there's an equally long history of people being punished for practicing it, and she should have been prepared for retribution when she started violating campus rules. Doesn't matter if it's right or wrong, it's just How Things Work.

The question is, would another student doing the same things for no cause at all receive the same punishment? If so, to what extent does she deserve to be let off because she was acting for a cause? Or is the entire court case in itself a method of drawing attention to said cause, rather than something she actually expects to win?

(Note, please, that I have every sympathy for her cause. The shit that's going on in Palestine right now needs to be stopped. I'm just a realist.)

[-] _cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 6 points 2 days ago

I’m just a realist.

no, you're a defeatist coward. a better world is possible, you just gotta get off your collective fucking asses and do something about it. greta can go get herself thrown in prison as a "terrorist" doing direct action that she knew would land her in chains, but you're too busy sitting here being a turbo lib about the brown people getting rowdy. "hurr durr, I'm a realist, hyuck hyuck!"

I hope you laugh when you look in the mirror, cause you're a fuckin' joke.

[-] Sunshine@piefed.social 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Stop supporting pointless punishments, it’s absolutely disgusting how VIU just silences the students. Protests against genocide need to be disruptive.

Why are you not calling for Zionists to be tried instead of wasting your breath on this weird “follow the law” performance.

The rules are written by the minority elites, especially with first past the post giving irresponsible parties all the power with 39% of the vote.

You support limiting the opportunities of women and palestinians because they dared to care about others. Your character is incredibly crummy. Stop enabling the torture and murder of children and women in Palestine.

Canada is legally obligated to stop genocide.

[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Your character is incredibly crummy.

I don't think this level of vitriol is appropriate for this community.

[-] OliveMoon@lemmy.ca -3 points 3 days ago

OK, while I support Sara Kishawi’s support of Palistine, I do not support her tactics. This is Canada. We have rules to which you need to adhere. If you don’t want to follow Canada’s rules, oh well.

One incident involved VIU staff wanting to close a rooftop patio on campus. Staff say Kishawi refused to leave and refused to provide her ID.

In the second incident, the university learned Kishawi had accessed the rooftop of a university building, endangering her own safety.

In the third, she was one of more than a dozen students involved in a sit-in, occupying building 255, and disrupting the learning environment. Kishawi recorded the incident.

And the fourth, she entered a restricted area of the library that was left open and wrote a slogan on a wall with a marker and put up some signs, one referencing a worker as racist.

[-] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

So this whole case is actually exactly about those Canadian laws, as defined in the Charter of Rights as the right to freedom speech and the right to freedom of assembly. The British Columbia Civil Liberties association is arguing that Charter rights should not be infringed upon just because they were expressed on a college campus (private property).

The BCCLA's legal argument here

Easier to read article here

Another explanation from VIU faculty themselves : "These suspensions violate President Saucier’s public statement from 31 May 2024: “Let me state that clearly: members of our community will not be punished for participating in the encampment.”"

If we were to say that freedom of speech is not allowed just because you're on private property, we're setting a very dangerous precedent. I do think that the freedom of assembly one is a bit harder to argue because of trespassing laws, but they are then policing why students assemble on the campus (where they normally would've been allowed to be), which crosses back onto freedom of speech.