The weather was glorious Tuesday afternoon in downtown Montreal. An ideal time to stroll, to walk slowly while paying attention to the activities that enliven the urban space. On the outskirts of the pro-Palestinian encampment established by McGill students, nestled between the Roddick portal, this immense stone structure which announces the university on Sherbrooke Street, and the humanities library, the atmosphere was joyful, friendly.
A hot dog stand filled the air, the usual stream of passers-by paraded through the aisles: students in a hurry, headphones stuck in their ears; workers crossing campus to escape the city center; curious tourists; the children of the daycare strolling gently, tightly clinging to a colorful snake. In the camp, people were busy preparing for the night while supportive students gathered, sitting on the ground, near the barricades. There was, frankly, not much to report.
This is the scene I saw when I received an email on my phone from McGill President Deep Saini announcing to the entire community that the University would not hesitate to resort to police intervention. in order to dismantle the camp. “If the occupation began calmly, it is now clear that the situation has worsened and risks getting worse,” it read.
The contrast between words and reality was astonishing, to say the least.
In the hours that followed, the situation did not change much. At rush hour, a few more supportive passers-by gathered around the tents. There was singing and drumming — nothing to do, however, with the disputed songs cited in the request for an injunction rejected by the Superior Court on Wednesday. Around 9 p.m., not much was happening. We prepared for the night, undoubtedly with a touch of anxiety aroused by the threatening words of the University and the request for an injunction which, at that moment, was still pending.
“We’re not here because we enjoy camping,” Zaynab, a student who has been involved in the camp for a few days, explained to me. “We are here because it’s the last thing we could do. » After the demonstrations, the call and email campaigns, the meetings with the administration behind closed doors, nothing made it possible to open a real dialogue about the demands made by the students. “There are even two students who were hospitalized after a hunger strike and the University continues to ignore them. Students no longer have any other choice to make themselves heard. »
This is sometimes what we forget in the debate on the ongoing occupations on campuses in the United States and Canada. The students have clear demands, limited to their relationship with their home establishment: an end to partnerships with Israel and a withdrawal of funding from companies that support the ongoing military assault against Gaza. Universities may well disagree on substance, but students choose rational and peaceful strategies to build a balance of power and try to move the lines.
It’s already arrived. In 1985, McGill University became the first university in Canada to sever its ties with the South African apartheid regime following pressure from students — a fact the University boasts of today on its website. We are told that it is not the same thing, never the same thing. History will perhaps pass another judgment on this.
On Wednesday, the Superior Court rejected the request for an injunction presented by two students to prohibit a group of organizations from participating in any demonstration whatsoever on campus. In support, we presented videos where we heard slogans deemed anti-Semitic uttered as part of various actions carried out since October 7.
The Superior Court judge found that the evidence does not demonstrate that the demonstrations had created a hostile and dangerous climate, and that the elements presented seemed rather to come from subjective perceptions and isolated cases.
This is not to say that some students could not have been offended by certain slogans or upset by tense conversations. However, it is not discomfort that determines the limits of freedom of expression. Furthermore, organizing demonstrations that disrupt the normal course of things – blocking the entrance to a building, for example – is indeed part of the arsenal of peaceful resistance.
As for the violence, material and immediate violence, we must instead look at the police repression of demonstrations on campus. The images captured during police interventions at Columbia or UCLA are incredibly violent. The fact that we unreservedly send armed agents to neutralize adolescents and young adults in universities is not the sign of a very healthy democracy.
Violent repression of youth when they resist tends not to stand the test of time very well. Students are said to be immature, idealistic, frivolous. However, they have an unfortunate tendency to know how to name injustice where the rest of society chooses to ignore it.
Columnist specializing in environmental justice issues, Aurélie Lanctôt is a doctoral student in law at McGill University.