A Palestinian flag flies over the pro-Palestinian encampment set up in front of Convocation Hall at the University of Toronto campus, in Toronto, on May 26.Frank Gunn/The Canadian Press
Lawyers for the University of Toronto argued in court that the pro-Palestinian encampment on its campus is a clear case of trespassing that restricts the liberty and expression of others and should be dismantled.
In a hearing before Ontario Superior Court Justice Markus Koehnen Wednesday, they laid out the case for a judicial order that would authorize police to evict the protesters.
The university has tried unsuccessfully to negotiate an end to the protest, which began on May 2, when protesters erected tents on the school’s King’s College Circle, part of a wave of encampments that swept across North American campuses in response to the war in Gaza.
On Wednesday, the university said negotiations with protesters had resumed after a period of impasse. Encampment leaders made an offer to resolve the dispute by dropping the third of their three demands, which are that the university disclose where its money is invested, divest from companies connected to the Israeli military and break ties with certain Israeli universities.
Breaking academic ties has been a sticking point for U of T’s administration because it would infringe on principles of openness and academic freedom. The university did not immediately accept the offer, but said it had responded with a counterproposal.
“We continue to pursue these parallel paths of dialogue and legal action,” University of Toronto president Meric Gertler said in a statement. “Our goal is still to secure a peaceful conclusion that returns Front Campus to the entire community and protects the rights of all community members to express themselves on the widest range of issues.”
UofT protesters’ demands complicated by investment agreements, CFO says
Speaking in court Wednesday, lawyer Monique Jilesen, acting on behalf of U of T, argued that the main issue for the court is whether the encampment is lawful. She said the university is the property owner of King’s College Circle, where the protest is located, and that the protesters, who arrived in the middle of the night, had been warned that erecting tents on campus is not permitted. The university issued a trespass notice late last month.
She said protesters have established an entry gate that is monitored 24 hours a day. They screen visitors, set out expectations for their conduct and restrict access to certain times of day, usually no earlier than 11 a.m. She said some of the protesters’ statements leave the impression that those who hold different views on Israel and the Palestinians would not be permitted to enter.
The encampment limits speech, she argued, which the university cannot tolerate.
“The respondents are standing at the gate and saying ‘Why are you here?’ ” Ms. Jilesen said. “They are taking control of the property.”
Ms. Jilesen asked what would happen to those who just wanted to have breakfast on the front campus, which sent a ripple of laughter through the public gallery. She said she didn’t intend it to be funny.
She added that the university is suffering reputational harm from its association with the protest, citing complaints from members of the community who said they were made to feel uncomfortable by anti-Israel slogans they encountered, either on signs or graffiti.
Some of the protest organizers, speaking outside of court, said the claims made by the university’s lawyers could not be tied to the encampment and amounted to hearsay.
Lawyers for members of the encampment named in the university’s application will present their case on Thursday. Their argument is expected to focus on the right to free expression and protest.
Lawyers for U of T relied heavily in their arguments on a case that involved the Occupy movement in 2011. The case, known as Batty v. City of Toronto, examined free-expression rights in the context of an encampment. In that case, the judge ruled that the city’s trespass notice did violate the protesters expression rights, but the infringement was justified as a reasonable limit prescribed by law.
“We are hopeful that the court realizes our right to freedom of expression and our right to protest and sides with us,” said Sara Rasikh, a graduate student and spokesperson for the encampment.
Ms. Rasikh defended the choice of an encampment as a protest tactic, saying it has captured the university’s attention in a way that previous protests did not.
“This encampment has proven to be a very powerful tactic and a successful one,” Ms. Rasikh said. “For the first time in U of T’s history, they’re not only negotiating with us, they are uttering the word Palestine.”
In a message to campus, Dr. Gertler said the university, by taking the encampment case to court and seeking police assistance, is trying to preserve the right to protest and debate for its entire community.