The University of Michigan is seeking feedback from the Ann Arbor campus community on a draft policy designed to address disruptions to university events and operations.

The proposed Disruptive Activity Policy states that “no one has the right to infringe on the exercise of others’ speech and activities by disrupting the normal celebrations, activities, and operations of the University.”

Responses to a feedback survey, which went live March 27, will be accepted from students, faculty and staff members on the Ann Arbor campus until 11:59 p.m. April 3.

The draft policy comes days after demonstrations March 24 significantly disrupted the university’s annual Honors Convocation.

In a March 26 message to the Ann Arbor campus community, President Santa J. Ono described the disruption as “unacceptable” and an “intrusion on one of the university’s most important academic traditions.”

“Like many of you, I am proud of our university’s history of protest. But none of us should be proud of what happened on Sunday,” Ono wrote. “We all must understand that, while protest is valued and protected, disruptions are not. One group’s right to protest does not supersede the right of others to participate in a joyous event.”

Ono also said that the disruption was not in “keeping with our student code and our longstanding policy on freedom of speech and artistic expression.” The Board of Regents reiterated the university’s stance on speech when it voted in January to approve the U-M Principles on Diversity of Thought and Freedom of Expression.

Those principles explained that the university’s commitment to free expression “does not extend to speech or conduct that violates the law or University policy,” and that U-M may reasonably regulate the time, place and manner of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt the university’s ordinary activities.

Under the draft Disruptive Activity Policy, students accused of a violation would receive written notice and, after an opportunity to meet with a U-M official, may accept responsibility and an assigned sanction, or choose to participate in a hearing.

Sanctions would include a formal reprimand up to and including suspension or expulsion, according to the draft policy.

Any allegation against a faculty or staff member would follow processes outlined separately, including but not limited to U-M Standard Practice Guide policies 201.96 and 201.12, respectively.

Contractors, volunteers or visitors who violate this policy would also face penalties.