UNITED States Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter once described academic freedom “as the business of the university to provide that atmosphere which is most conducive to speculation, experiment and creation.”
In Justice Frankfurter’s words, academic freedom is “an atmosphere in which there prevail where the four essential freedoms of a university – to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study.”
In Philippine jurisdiction, academic freedom is enshrined in Article XIV, Section 5(2) of the 1987 Constitution: Academic freedom shall be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning.
In the landmark case of Garcia vs. The Faculty Admission Committee, Loyola School of Theology (G.R. No. L-40779, November 28,1975), the Philippine Supreme Court had the occasion to note the scope of academic freedom recognized by the Constitution as follows: “For it is to be noted that the reference is to the ‘institutions of higher learning’ as the recipients of this boon… It decides for itself its aims and objectives and how best to attain them. It is free from outside coercion or interference save possibly when the overriding public welfare calls for some restraint. It has a wide sphere of autonomy certainly extending to the choice of students. This constitutional provision is not to be construed in a niggardly manner or in a grudging fashion. That would be to frustrate its purpose, nullify its intent.”
As corporate entities, educational institutions of higher learning are inherently endowed with the right to establish their policies, academic and otherwise, unhampered by external controls or pressure. (Ateneo de Manila University vs. Judge Capulong, 294 Phil. 654, 673 [1993]). For the administration of the university rests not with the courts, but with the administrators of the institution. (Saint Louis University vs. Olairez, G.R. No. 197126, January 19, 2021, citing Parate vs. Isibor, 868 F. 2d 821 [1989])
The case of Garcia vs. Faculty Admission Committee, Loyola School of Theology enumerated the internal conditions for academic freedom in the university—that is, the academic staff should have de facto control over the following functions: (1) the admission and examination of students; (2) the curricula for courses of study; (3) the appointment and tenure of office of academic staff; and (4) the allocation of income among the different categories of expenditure.
Academic institutions are free to establish and impose academic standards and rules on conduct upon its students. These policies are not only essential for the institution’s survival but are imperative if academic quality is sought to be maintained or elevated. (Saint Louis University vs. Olairez, G.R. No. 197126, January 19, 2021) Students who are admitted to study are consequently subject to the school’s supervision and should there be a finding of infractions, it is within the right of the school to mete out penalties, including dismissal. (Ibid.) Schools of learning are given ample discretion to formulate rules and guidelines in the granting of honors for purposes of graduation. This is part of academic freedom.
However, an educational institution’s discretion on the exercise of academic freedom is not absolute. Like other constitutional rights, it must on occasion be balanced against important competing interests. (Saint Louis University vs. Olairez, citing Dow Chemical Co. v. Allen, 672 F.2d 1262 [17th Circuit 1982]) It is a privilege that assumes a correlative duty to exercise it responsibly. An equally telling precept is a long recognized mandate, so well expressed in Article 19 of the Civil Code, that every “person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.” (Ibid.) Where the decision of the academic institution runs afoul overriding constitutional rights such as right to peaceable assembly and free speech, the same should be struck down. (Ibid.)
Moreover, it bears stressing that academic freedom has also been identified with the individual autonomy of educators to “investigate, pursue, [and] discuss free from internal and external interference or pressure.” Thus, the academic freedom of faculty members, professors, researchers, or administrators is defended based on the freedom of speech and press. (Pimentel vs. Legal Education Board, G.R. No. 230642, September 10, 2019), citing Ateneo de Manila University vs. Judge Capulong and Keyishian vs. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589, 603 [1967])
Also, academic freedom is enjoyed by the students themselves. (Pimentel vs. Legal Education Board) Jurisprudence has so far understood academic freedom of the students as the latter’s right to enjoy in school the guarantees of the Bill of Rights. (Ibid.)
