Safe to Speak · Our demands
Enforceable safeguards for in Europe.
Three reforms: safer to report, fairer to decide, easier to put right.
Three demands
-
European minimum safeguards
Europe should establish clear minimum safeguards against abuse of academic power, so that a student’s protection does not depend on where they happen to study.
What it would mean
- A shared European baseline covering, at minimum: protection from retaliation, independent complaint handling, conflict-of-interest rules, deadlines, written reasons, appeal and remedy.
- The baseline sets a floor. Countries and universities stay free to go further and to design procedures that fit their systems.
- Protection that does not depend on a student’s country, institution or nationality, including for mobile students and doctoral candidates.
-
Safeguarding as part of higher-education quality
Protection from abuse of power should become an explicit part of how higher-education quality and institutional accountability are assessed.
What it would mean
- Quality assurance asks whether institutions have effective, independent procedures for concerns about abuse of academic power.
- Institutional reviews look at whether those procedures are known, used and followed up, not only whether a policy document exists.
- Safeguarding is treated as part of academic quality, alongside teaching, assessment and student support.
-
Public monitoring and accountability
Students should not have to search through dozens of statutes and regulations to find out whether basic protections exist.
What it would mean
- Public, comparable information on which safeguards exist in each system and institution, with the sources behind it.
- Regular review, so that changes to rules are visible and gaps are tracked over time.
- Findings that institutions can correct and reply to, as StudentSafe Europe does with its own evidence base.
What we ask
A floor of protection, not outside control.
Not asking for
- Outside control of teaching, research or academic judgement.
- Weaker university autonomy.
- A presumption that complaints are true, or that staff are at fault.
- One identical procedure imposed on every institution.
Asking for
- A common floor of protection.
- Independent, timely and reasoned procedures.
- Fair process for everyone involved.
- Transparency about what protections exist.
Who can act
Who can act.
European institutions
Setting common expectations for student protection across the European Union.
National governments and parliaments
Writing minimum safeguards into higher-education law.
Quality-assurance agencies
Making safeguarding an explicit part of institutional review.
Universities and student representatives
Adopting and monitoring safeguards now, without waiting for legislation.
These demands are advocacy and can be argued with. The StudentSafe Standard v0.1.1 is the separate research framework, so findings follow the evidence, not the campaign.