Dear colleagues,

Late last week, a draft copy of the Mid-Term Plan was distributed. As a result of canvassing opinion throughout the Trust during May - a process that produced various radical criticisms of the Mid-Term Plan - the plan has now changed: it is no longer a plan but an attempt to “clarify strategic objectives and establish a basic consensus of all members of the Ristumeikan Academy” (“Chuki Keikaku” (An) no Zengaku Togi o Teiki suru ni atatte, Japanese version, p. 3). A point that is emphasized is that, after the Mid-Term Plan is finalized, individual issues will, as has been the case in the past, be discussed throughout the academy if and when they arise, and the Board of Trustees will then make a decision and implement policy (ibid., p. 4). In the discussions between the Union and the Trustees on 28 June about the Mid-Term Plan, the Trustees emphasized the point that the plan was not a “plan of implementation” but rather merely a document that “indicated direction” (memo of first meeting with Vice-Chancellor and Trustees in charge of academic affairs).

The “strategic objectives” that indicate Ritsumeikan's direction are indicated by the sub-title of the Mid-Term Plan, “Building an Academic Base in the Asia Pacific Region that is Open to the World”. According to page 10 of the Mid-Term Plan:

“Ritsumeikan is situated in Japan, which is part of the Asia Pacific region, and is a private and comprehensive academy. Based on cooperation between Ritsumeikan University, which takes as its educational ideal the motto “peace and democracy”, and APU, which takes as one of its founding ideals the motto “peace, freedom, and humanism”, the academy will produce unique research through joint efforts with world-class universities and other institutions, and, together with Ritsumeikan schools, hopes to create a comprehensive academic center in the Asia Pacific region that builds on networks and that educates human resources who will become pioneers in the 21^st century”.

Therefore, Ritsumeikan's “direction” is based on the perception of APU as an ideal university.

However, APU refused to accept an application from a member of faculty to travel overseas in order to complete obligations imposed by a kakenhi research project, and the member of faculty therefore had no choice but to travel without permission. APU determined that this action was “inappropriate for a faculty member” and fired him or her. However, the Kyoto Local Court has found that this decision was an abuse of the right of dismissal, and that the dismissal is void. This is an example of the sort of amateurish personal affairs procedures that are taking place at APU. (For a copy of the court decision in Japanese, see http://university.main.jp/blog3/apu_karishobun (20060510).pdf).

At the same time [, in a different case], despite the fact that Ritsumeikan held a meeting in which every participant understood that they had been promised that contracts would be renewed, as a result of which people who received this promise accepted work at APU, they have now been informed that their contracts will not be extended. These lecturers have now filed suit in the Oita Local Court, and hearings on their case have begun (see in Japanese http://ac-net.org/rtm-net/index.php?job=apushousai).

The notion that current faculty in Ritsumeikan could reach a basic consensus over a “direction” determined by a Board of Trustees that has not made clear its own responsibility for the Abuse of the Right of Dismissal Incident which has destroyed the “value of the Ritsumeikan brand” (“21 Seiki no Ritsumeikan Gakuen ni okeru Shinzaisei Seisaku: Senryaku to Mokuhyo”, p. 16) would be too irresponsible to future members of the Ritsumeikan Academy, and would mean that faculty would commit the same sin as the Board of Trustees and make it impossible to ever create a valuable Ritsumeikan brand. A university in which management alone is full of energy, but the education sector is in deep distress and completely under the thumb of management will never become a “brand”. Members of faculty must never agree with a “direction” that takes APU as an ideal because APU is facing grave issues in terms of its appointments and dismissals procedures - an area which touches to the heart of an institution.