Law school stoush: Auckland Uni vice-chancellor Dawn Freshwater faces backlash

Vice-chancellor of the University of Auckland Dawn Freshwater. Photo / NZ Herald.

• A bid to merge the University of Auckland’s law and business faculties has led to a stand-off between leadership and academics.
• Opponents argue the merger would hurt the 140-year-old law school’s standing and undermine its independence.
• The university’s council will consider the proposal at a meeting next week, after its peak academic body voted to reject it earlier this month

University of Auckland vice-chancellor Dawn Freshwater is facing another revolt from her academic staff – this time over a contentious merger of two major faculties.

The stand-off began in November, when the university proposed a shake-up that would combine its Faculty of Law with its Faculty of Business and Economics.

University of Auckland vice-chancellor Dawn Freshwater. Photo / Supplied

The proposed merger would also split the 140-year-old law school into separate departments focused on private and public law, with academics reporting to a newly-appointed dean.

The university pitched the plan as a strategic move rather than a cost-cutting measure, reasoning that it would foster more collaboration and better align with its “strategic goals”.

“The aim of the proposal is to create a comprehensive faculty that brings together distinct and complementary disciplinary strengths,” it stated in a summary document.

But the bid was swiftly met with angry opposition from law academics, along with alumni and major figures in the legal community.

Now, there’s widespread worry about the proposal going before the university council on Monday despite the senate - the university’s peak academic body - overwhelmingly rejecting the proposal in its own vote this month.

That came soon after a review committee, tasked with considering nearly 800 submissions on the plans, recommended against splitting the law school if the proposal was to go ahead.

One academic feared a merger would hurt the law faculty’s international standing and its ability to attract and retain top staff and students.

“No clear rationale has been put forward for the proposal, it has not been costed and no cost-benefit analysis of it has been done.”

They said a fundamental concern among staff was that combining the faculties in any form would undermine independence of legal education.

“We train lawyers to serve people across all sectors of society; and our research plays a vital role in holding power to account,” they said.

“We can’t do either of those things when we are seen to be aligned with commercial interests.”

Another law faculty member, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity, was scathing of the way the process had been run, arguing staff and students had been given little time and information to offer feedback.

Given that 70% of the university’s senate – a body made up of top faculty members that advises on academic matters – voted the proposal down, those in the law school were “adamant” the university drop the proposal, the insider said.

“The law school’s independence and reputation as well as its relationships with the profession and donors are on the line.”

Law Association chief executive Clayton Kimpton. Photo / Dean Purcell

The Law Association was similarly “deeply concerned” the merger would weaken the law programme’s rigour and prestige.

Its chief executive, Clayton Kimpton, said the proposal should be carefully reconsidered - whether that meant cancelling it or revising its scope and objectives.

Another law school alumni, former Court of Appeal judge Raynor Asher KC, told the Herald that folding law into the business faculty “misunderstands what law teaching is about”.

“Because this is such an important issue, it’s going to greatly damage the reputation of the law school and it’s going to make the best students from Auckland go elsewhere.”

One academic said they’d already heard of students choosing to go to Victoria University because of this proposal, “and we know of staff considering leaving if it goes ahead”.

Tertiary Education Union organiser Nicole Wallace said that, following the senate’s vote, the union’s expectation was that university’s council shouldn’t progress the proposal.

“But we’re waiting to see on that.”

One academic told the Herald they were aware of just one instance in the past 30 years of the council acting against the views of the senate.

“It would raise significant legal issues if council were to overrule senate and sign off on combining the faculties.”

It remained to be seen whether a legal challenge would be mounted - but the Herald understands that’s something already being discussed.

A university spokesperson confirmed the proposal is to be considered at next week’s council meeting.

They said Freshwater had advised she was “inclined to accept” the recommendations made by the review committee, subject to senate advice and council approval.

Asked for Freshwater’s response to arguments that the council shouldn’t be advancing a proposal rejected by the senate, the spokesperson pointed out that body’s role was “advisory”.

“Input from senate and council will inform final recommendations for the new faculty arrangements.”

The row comes after Freshwater met a similar backlash among academics last year, when the senate voted to pause a makeover of the university’s curriculum amid concerns around widespread course cuts.

Jamie Morton is a specialist in science and environmental reporting. He joined the Herald in 2011 and writes about everything from conservation and climate change to natural hazards and new technology.

Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.