One of the critical features of legal education is that it encourages and demands independence of thought and expression and that independence is crucial for the Faculty of Law and those who teach.
Faculties of Law play an important constitutional role in upholding and protecting the rule of law – the idea that law constrains power and holds power to account. To do this, the Law School needs to be independent and be seen to be independent from all other interests. Its existing independence as a faculty enables it and its students to openly scrutinise illegalities and abuses of power by both public and private actors, and to highlight injustice wherever it occurs in the community.
Thus legal education is not just a gateway to a career in law but also a tool for personal development, societal contribution, and professional growth. It equips individuals with the skills, knowledge, and mindset to succeed in diverse fields while fostering a deeper understanding of justice and governance.
All of this is at risk at the University of Auckland.
The Vice-Chancellor of the University of Auckland released a proposal document dated 12 November 2024 entitled “Consideration of the future organization of the Faculties of Law and Business and Economics.”
The proposal suggests merging the Faculty of Law with the Faculty of Business & Economics to form a new, comprehensive faculty that leverages the strengths of both disciplines.
Which means the law school will lose some of its autonomy.
Under this proposal it will become a Department under the umbrella faculty of Business and Economics. The Dean will lose his or her seat at the Council table. Any advocacy for the Law School will be done by the Dean of Business. The independence and identity enjoyed by the Law School will come to an end with the merger.
A loss of independence through combining the Faculties will also alter the academic frame within which our staff and students operate. Every faculty has its own values, culture, priorities and interests, and changing where the Faculty of Law sits in the University will have a significant impact on these core parts of the Faculty’s identity as well as the Faculty’s teaching and research pursuits.
Hopefully the proposal doesn’t proceed.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
3 comments:
I don't see the problem here. Today NZ university law faculties certainly don't teach independent thought and expression. They demand conformity with the lecturers' radical political views, especially on the Treaty. They don't protect the rule of law. Instead they teach tikanga and judicial activism in which academics and judges just invent laws as they go. This activism is critiqued according to it's wokeness. A NZ legal education is not a tool for personal growth. Just look at the recent graduates. The lecturers are hardly models of personal development, being people who got good grades but who can't survive in the real world.
The proposal is that the faculties merge, rather than the law faculty being taken over by business faculty. Hopefully doing so will bring the former down to earth and teach students the skills that employers want.
I'm all for it , if it means diminishing the influence that staffers like the racist and Pakeha hater Kylee Quince loses her position at the university
Or..... a merger could allow the indoctrination action to continue in a less obvious way ( under the cover of the Business Faculty). Most top universities in the world have these 2 disciplines clearly separated.
Post a Comment