James Cook University under fire for ‘silencing’ academic over reef

Judge blasts Queensland university for silencing professor who criticised institution’s research into health of reef.

Peter Ridd claims unfair dismissal from James Cook University. Picture: Liam Kidston.

A judge has blasted James Cook University for silencing, rather than debating, one of its professors who criticised the institution’s research into the health of the Great Barrier Reef.

Sacked professor Peter Ridd, who was dismissed last year after publicly criticising lack of quality assurance processes on the university’s research and for discussing confidential disciplinary proceedings against him, said he had “no choice” but to make his concerns public.

On the second day of an unfair dismissal hearing in Brisbane yesterday, Federal Circuit Court judge Salvatore Vasta said ­Professor Ridd, who worked at JCU for 30 years, was driven to speak out about his plight out of “frustration”.

Judge Vasta said that rather than engaging in “robust debate” following Professor Ridd’s accusations, the university and its staff tried to silence him.

“Instead of saying, ‘here, he wants to have the debate, let’s ­debate it’, he’s forced into defending his name,” Judge Vasta said.

He said it was apparent that Professor Ridd spoke out about the disciplinary process because no one else at the university would dare.

“That is the sort of culture of fear that happens in large institutions where the merits of arguments being promulgated are not being debated,” Judge Vasta said.

The university’s barrister, Christopher Murdoch, said Professor Ridd’s comments about the university and its staff had been “particularly disparaging and pejorative”.

Mr Murdoch said Professor Ridd knowingly broke the university’s code of conduct, which was “specifically embraced by the enterprise agreement” and went beyond exercising his right to ­intellectual freedom when he made disparaging remarks in the media about the university and his colleagues.

Under cross-examination, Professor Ridd said he had published information about the disciplinary process on a GoFundMe page and with a journalist from The Australian because he felt he was being gagged and needed to share his story to get public donations to fund a legal battle against the university. “I had no choice,” Professor Ridd told the court.

“I knew that I couldn’t accept the final censure because it would silence me.

“The only way I could do legal action was to get donations.

“You can’t get donations that ended up being in the amount of $260,000 without being upfront.

“I had completely lost faith in the disciplinary process and I thought it was my only chance of survival as an academic.”

Professor Ridd’s lawyers have argued that an intellectual freedom clause in the enterprise agreement entitled their client to criticise the university.

The first alleged breach of the university’s code of conduct ­occurred in April 2016, when Professor Ridd emailed a journalist to allege that images of diseased coral supplied to the media by his university colleagues were misleading.

After receiving a warning from the university, Professor Ridd was censured again in ­November 2017 after appearing on Sky News and making similar claims about the lack of quality assurance processes on coral reef science.

In court yesterday, Professor Ridd said the science needed to be “more rigorous” because it ­informed public policy primary industries and tourism.