The appointment of U Penn visiting scholar María Paula Romo has drawn criticism because of her past. Penn says only court can hold Romo accountable

[ad_1]

Tulia Falleti, director of the Center for Latin American and Latinx Studies at the University of Pennsylvania, knew her choice for the fall semester as a visiting scholar would be controversial.

That choice was María Paula Romo, an Ecuadorian professor, lawyer and politician whose curriculum vitae is also tainted with accusations of human rights violations. Police under their jurisdiction reportedly used excessive force to crack down on Ecuadorians protesting austerity measures in 2019. Romo was removed from office, but has denied any constitutional violation.

“I did not expect this level of mobilization in any way,” said Falleti, referring to an August online petition – now 12,000 signatures strong – demanding that Romo be removed from the non-research meeting. paid.

Romo’s role at Penn answers a larger philosophical question for universities: how should an institution deal with controversial figures?

Falleti said she is maintaining her appointment and that Romo will be allowed to complete her semester as a visiting scholar, which will end on December 22. But Falleti admits that Romo’s semester has not reached its potential. Usually, visiting scholars attend center events to discuss and promote their work. Romo didn’t because she could have engaged with the Penn community “at a very high cost,” Falleti said.

The pushback has resulted in at least one change in the application process for visiting scholars. Future applicants will need to include a recommendation from a Penn faculty member, Falleti said.

Falleti said she personally disagreed with Romo’s government, but found merit in the research proposed by Romo on the challenges facing democracy in Latin America, “including socio-economic inequalities, the role of social media, corruption and populism, especially in the period just before and during the pandemic. “

Falleti thinks it’s his job to bring different perspectives to the campus, even if they are unpopular. That’s why she invited former Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff to Penn after being impeached in Brazil for alleged corruption.

Universities have often faced free speech issues around controversial figures, often involving a guest speaker who said something considered inflammatory.

For example, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology canceled a lecture this semester after students learned the speaker criticized efforts to promote diversity, equity and inclusion on college campuses. Conversely, Penn State felt it had an obligation to protect free speech as a public university and allow a student organization to house right-wing figure Milo Yiannopoulos.

Ken Paulson, director of the Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University, says Penn’s situation is different because a private university has more leeway over who it invites to campus.

In October 2019, thousands of Ecuadorians took to the streets to protest a plan to end 40-year-old fuel subsidies. While most of the demonstrators were peaceful, there was looting and clashes with the national police. Authorities responded with water cannons and fired expired tear gas at protesters.

Human rights observers would later say police quelled the protests with “excessive force” and expressed concern over the arbitrary arrests. Human Rights Watch would report that police were responsible for at least four protesters killed.

While Romo later apologized for the tear gas, Ecuador’s National Assembly would censor and sack her in 2020 for the police response.

Romo, who did not respond to requests for comment, previously said she had fulfilled her duty to protect citizens during the unrest.

Falleti said she was aware of this background when choosing Romo, determining that Romo’s time as a congressman and his role as a delegate to Ecuador’s 2008 constitutional convention outweighed his role. in demonstrations. Most of the criticism, Falleti added, appeared to come from outside the university.

Falleti said it was not for him to judge how Romo, who could face legal action, handled the protests.

“It’s up to the courts to decide whether or not she was guilty. So far she has not been found guilty of any wrongdoing, ”Falleti said.

For Julie Gamble, a former postdoctoral fellow at Penn’s Perry World House and professor of urban studies currently living in Ecuador, Romo’s appointment is a matter of social justice. She spoke out against the nomination and maintains that Penn “legitimized Romo by maintaining an association with her.”

Gamble is among those critics who say that while some of history’s most nefarious characters might offer different perspectives, that wouldn’t be a reason to bring them to campus.

In a September letter, Gamble and three other academics with previous ties to Penn asked Falleti to reconsider his appointment. The letter sparked a renewed look at Romo’s tenure as Home Secretary. During Penn’s investigation, Romo’s biography was removed from the centre’s website.

While Penn would find no reason to quash Romo’s appointment, the biography only returned after Gamble co-wrote an op-ed in The Daily Pennsylvanian, Penn’s student newspaper, last week. Gamble and more than 50 other academics accused Penn of essentially hiding Romo’s appointment by failing to promote his presence. The academics demanded to know the process for selecting a visiting scholar and why the center had removed Romo’s biography despite maintaining his appointment.

Falleti said that the forgetting of the biography was due to a lack of staff.

Falleti wants to save what she can from Romo’s appointment. She wants to organize an event with Romo and Yaku Perez, a former Ecuadorian presidential candidate and indigenous environmental activist, next year. Romo has expressed interest, according to Falleti.

The center could also establish a waiting period for decision-makers who leave their positions before they can apply for the visiting scholar position.

Paulson, of the Free Speech Center, said Penn officials may not have a free speech issue, but they certainly have an issue of academic philosophy to explore.

“What do you think should take place at a university and what will your standards be?” ” he said.

[ad_2]