CTR Home Internal  Relations and Communications Home About CTR Publication Schedule CTR Archives

March 1, 2001 Letters to the Editor



Student presidents asked to respect rights

(This letter was sent February 12 to the six student association presidents at Concordia.)

I have no doubt that you are fully aware of the two incidents involving the forcible closure of recruiting and information tables in the Hall Building provided to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Black Watch Regiment. Responsible departments of the University are currently conducting investigations of these events. I can assure you that the University will pursue all actions possible under the Code of Rights and Responsibilities.

Dissent and protest are indispensable and invaluable components of both our academic and political systems. These two incidents do not qualify as either. They are, however, an attempt by certain individuals to deny organizations with which they disagree and of which they disapprove the same rights of free assembly and free speech to which we are all entitled.
The University cannot and will not tolerate these tactics if we are to survive as an institution committed to upholding academic, political and social freedom.

Tolerance, openness, patience and an unswerving dedication to the rights of others are demanded of us all if we are to guarantee the protection of the rights that we all enjoy. As leaders of the student community, your willingness to communicate this message to your membership, and to condemn those who would subvert the rights of others for their own gain, will be crucial in ensuring that Concordia contributes to the defense of the rights and freedoms of all members of our community.

I am writing to you publicly to ask for your assistance in this challenge.

Michael Di Grappa
Vice-Rector, Services


Clarification on Senate Notes

Regarding Senate Notes (CTR, Feb. 8), I would like to point out the following:

The following sentence is inaccurate: “Considerable discussion resulted from the fact that the School of Graduate Studies could not present the changes to the curriculum in their final form and was asking Senate to approve them in principle.”

It should read:

“The Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science presented a summary of their curriculum proposal. The proposal had not been scheduled by the steering committee of the Council of the School of Graduate Studies because it was incomplete and contained errors. At the request of the Dean of the Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, the Council of the School of Graduate Studies approved the curriculum proposal in principle on the condition that the completed proposal be corrected and approved at a subsequent Council meeting.”

The statement, “the changes were passed” should be corrected to read: “Senate passed the proposal in principle on the condition that the complete and corrected proposal be approved by the Council of the School of Graduate Studies and returned to Senate for debate and approval at a subsequent meeting.”

Elizabeth Saccá
Associate Dean of Graduate Studies