| Topic: | Appointments, Tenure and Promotion, Awards and Honours |
|---|---|
| Approval Authority: | Senate |
| Approval Date: | June 26, 2025 |
| Effective Date: | July 1, 2025 |
1. Purpose
1.1 The University personalizes its abstract ideals through the granting of honorary degrees to people whose achievements represent the values the University cherishes, whose benefactions have strengthened the community and the institution, and whose public lives are deemed worthy of emulation. The granting of an honorary degree provides a focal point for Convocation ceremonies. The citation of honourable deeds and the words of experience of the honorary graduand challenge and inspire the university and reinforce its links to the wider community. The granting of a degree honoris causa is the highest distinction the University can bestow on person. In granting the degree, the University engages its reputation before its community and the world and, at times, must act to protect that reputation from honourees who have discredited themselves such that they are no longer worthy of the honour.
1.2 This Policy establishes rules and procedures that frame the process to review an honorary degree bestowed upon a person by the University. Its aim is to protect the University’s reputation from harm caused by honourees whose actions have discredited them, while ensuring that the review of an honour, which can conclude in the recission of the honour, is conducted equitably.
2. Scope and Application
2.1 Scope
This Policy applies to the review of honorary degrees bestowed by the University. It does not encompass other distinctions conferred or bestowed by the University. The process to bestow honours is set in Guidelines established by the Senate Sub-committee on Honorary Degrees and Ceremonials and is not regulated under this Policy.
2.2 Application
This policy applies to all members of the University Community who submit a request to the effect that an honour be rescinded, honourees, officers of the University who have a role in the process of reviewing honours, members of the Senate Sub-committee on Honorary Degrees and Ceremonials, the Executive Committee of Senate, and the Secretary of Senate.
3. Definitions
For the purposes of this Policy, the term:
Honour: means an honorary degree bestowed by the University,
Honouree: means a person on whom the University has bestowed an honorary degree or their estate in succession
Secretary: means the Secretary of Senate as appointed by the President under section 2.5 of the Rules of Senate.
Sub-committee: means the Senate Sub-committee on Honorary Degrees and Ceremonials,
University Community: means a member of faculty, a student, an employee or an officer of the University.
4. Policy
4.1 A review of an honour shall be conducted where the Sub-committee receives credible information that an honouree:
a. has been convicted of any criminal offence (and all appeal options have been exhausted) which shall be held by the Executive Committee of Senate to be of an immoral, scandalous, or disgraceful nature;
b. has obtained the honour by fraud, deception, or any other inappropriate means;
c. has had their name removed for misconduct by a properly constituted legal authority from any official register of members of the profession to which they belong; or
d. has engaged in conduct which, in the reasonable opinion of the Executive Committee of Senate, constitutes a significant departure from generally recognized standards of public behavior and which is deemed to undermine the public reputation of the University, or is inconsistent with the University’s mission and values, or constitutes a breach of any agreement made with the University as a condition of the conferment of the honour.
4.2 All communications, information, records and documents regarding a review of an honour or in support of a decision to sustain or rescind an honour, are confidential. Only persons who have a role in the processes established under this Policy will be informed of such processes and only to the extent necessary to execute their role under this Policy.
5. Roles and Responsibilities
5.1 The Chair of the Sub-committee on Honorary Degrees and Ceremonials will ensure that the proceedings of the Sub-committee comply with the requirements under this Policy and that all matters brought before the Sub-committee for consideration under this Policy be resolved fairly and equitably.
5.2 The Secretary of the Sub-committee is responsible for providing guidance and advice, supporting the duties and responsibilities of the Sub-committee and Senate Executive Committee and diligently preforming all duties assigned to them under this Policy.
5.3 Members of the Sub-committee and of the Executive Committee of Senate are responsible for conducting deliberations in a fair and equitable manner, in accordance with all University Conflict of Interest policies, with consideration of the balance to be struck between the protection of the reputation of the University and the potential reputational harm to the honouree in all matters coming before it under this Policy.
5.4 The Executive Committee of Senate is:
a. responsible for the implementation of this Policy
b. granted authority to establish procedures:
i. To frame notices and communications under this Policy
ii. To further define the roles and responsibilities under this section of entities and officers of the University
iii. To define the processes and procedures to submit a request to review or reestablish an honour under sections 7.1 and 7.4.
6. Review
This Policy will be reviewed by the Sub-committee every 5 years with any following recommendations to proceed to the Executive Committee of Senate and, on the recommendation of Senate Executive, to Senate for approval.
7. Procedures
Initiation of a Review of an Honour
7.1 The Sub-committee will meet to consider whether to conduct a review of an honour:
a. Upon receipt by the Chair or the Secretary of a written request to that effect from a member of the University Community; or
b. At the Chair’s initiative, from information available to the Chair, including information provided by the Secretary; or
c. At the request of the Executive Committee of Senate.
7.2 In coming to a determination as to whether a review should be conducted, the Sub-committee will consider all information available in the public record, provided by the Chair or the Secretary of the Sub-committee, the Executive Committee of Senate or any other source of information deemed useful by the Sub-committee, and ascertain whether there is sufficient credible information to warrant a review.
7.3 If the Sub-committee, after considering all information available,
a. is of the opinion that the information is insufficient or spurious, it will declare that the honour is sustained, and the matter closed; or
b. is of the opinion that the information is sufficient and credible, it will initiate a review of the honour.
7.4 Following a decision by the Sub-committee to initiate a review, the Secretary will provide notice to the honouree, or a representative of their estate, of the review and describe to them the process of review under this Policy, in accordance with procedures established further to this Policy by the Executive Committee of Senate. The Secretary will also inform the President and the Executive Committee of Senate, in confidence, that a review will be conducted.
Conducting a Review of an Honour
7.5 To conduct a review of an honour, the Sub-committee will:
a. request that the Secretary investigate within reason and with the means normally available to the University, allegations brought to its attention regarding the honouree and submit to the Sub-committee a report of findings.
b. share the report of findings with the honouree and offer an opportunity to address the findings in writing or in person before the Sub-committee by a deadline established by the Sub-committee, while making it clear that the review will continue even if the honouree omits to reply before the deadline.
c. based on elements of the report of findings that the Sub-committee, after considering the rebuttal from the honouree (if any), deems credible, approve and submit a report to the Executive Committee of Senate with a recommendation as to whether the honour should be rescinded.
Rescission of an Honour
7.6 The Executive Committee of Senate, on a recommendation from the Sub-committee, will rescind an honour when an honouree:
a. has been convicted of any criminal offence (and all appeal options have been exhausted) which shall be held by the Executive Committee of Senate to be of an immoral, scandalous, or disgraceful nature;
b. has obtained the honour by fraud, deception, or any other inappropriate means;
c. has had their name removed for misconduct by a properly constituted legal authority from any official register of members of the profession to which they belong; or
d. has engaged in conduct which, in the reasonable opinion of the Executive Committee of Senate, constitutes a significant departure from generally recognized standards of public behavior and which is deemed to undermine the public reputation of the University, or is inconsistent with the University’s mission and values, or constitutes a breach of any agreement made with the University as a condition of the conferment of the honour.
7.7 If, on consideration of a recommendation from the Sub-committee, the Executive Committee of Senate determines
a. that the honour is sustained, the matter is deemed closed, the Secretary will inform the honouree of the decision to sustain the honour and that all rights and privileges remain. A matter that has been closed cannot be reopened unless, in the opinion of the Sub-committee, significant new information has come forth that warrants a new review; or
b. that the honour is rescinded, the Secretary will:
i. inform the former honouree that they may no longer style themselves as a recipient of an honour from the University;
ii. request of the former honouree that they return their honorary degree parchment and, upon receiving it, destroy it before witnesses (preferably the General Counsel or the University Registrar or their designates); and
iii. remove the name of the former honouree from the list of honourees.
Reestablishment of an Honour
7.8 The Executive Committee of Senate may reestablish an honour it has rescinded when, following a submission to that effect from the former honouree, it believes that there is sufficient evidence that the honour was rescinded in error. The process to reestablish the honour is similar to the process to sustain and rescind an honour under this Policy, and will be in accordance with procedures established further to this Policy by the Executive Committee of Senate.
Return of the Honour
7.9 At any time, an honouree may return their honour to the University. If an honour is returned to the University while a review in being conducted, the review immediately ends, and the matter is closed. On the return of an honour, the Secretary will implement section 6.8 b.
| Legislative History: | Approved by Senate: June 26, 2025 |
|---|