OfS Freedom of Speech Complaints Scheme: What Higher Education Providers Need to Know 

The Office for Students (the OfS) has now published rules for its new freedom of speech complaints scheme, due to open on 1 September 2026. The scheme represents a significant development in the higher education regulatory framework, creating a new external route for certain individuals to challenge decisions they believe have restricted lawful freedom of speech or academic freedom.

Alongside the complaints scheme rules, the OfS has amended and clarified its freedom of speech guidance (Regulatory advice 24: Guidance related to freedom of speech) in response to the University of Sussex judgment. Together, these developments provide further clarity on the regulatory framework governing freedom of speech in higher education and may have practical implications for registered providers

Who can make a freedom of speech complaint?

The OfS scheme will be available to staff, including academics and applicants for academic posts, visiting speakers, non-student members and others such as emeritus professors. The OfS scheme will not be available to students (as defined in the rules) who will be able raise eligible complaints through the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (the OIA).

A complaint under the OfS scheme must claim that:

• an individual has suffered adverse consequences because of something that the governing body of the institution they are complaining about has or has not done; and
• these consequences have come about because the institution has – or might have – breached its duty to secure free speech within the law.

When can a complaint be made?

Importantly, the action or inaction that a complainant is complaining about must have taken place on or after 1 September 2026. The complaint will need to be submitted about the “governing body” of an institution and an institution’s internal complaints procedure should be used before submitting a complaint via the OfS free speech complaints scheme.

The OfS states they will normally only accept a free speech complaint:

• once the complainant has received confirmation from the institution that they have completed that process, or, if earlier;
• once 90 days have elapsed since that process began.

This is more realistic than the original 30-day time period proposed in the consultation but, given the complexity of issues involved in free speech complaints, may still be a challenging timescale for institutions to meet.

What outcomes can the OfS impose?

Possible outcomes include that a complaint is justified, partly justified or not justified and parties will have the chance to respond to the provisional decision before the OfS makes a final decision and publishes outcomes. Where the OfS finds in favour of a complainant, it can make recommendations including:

• an apology;
•  changes to policies or procedures; or
• payment of a sum of money to the complainant.

If an institution does not follow the OfS’s recommendations as part of a complaint process, this will trigger OfS engagement in terms of compliance with the conditions of registration and could escalate to regulatory action.

The OfS has stated that it expects to complete most complaint reviews within six months. The OfS scheme is free to use. However, where the OfS makes a decision that a free speech complaint is justified or partly justified, the OfS may require the institution to pay its costs in relation to making the decision up to the date of notification.

Changes to the OfS freedom of speech guidance

Alongside the complaints scheme rules, the OfS has amended and clarified its freedom of speech guidance in response to the University of Sussex judgment.

Article 17 and freedom of expression

The most notable addition is the inclusion of new paragraphs 16A and 16B, which introduce Article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights into the guidance for the first time. Article 17 provides that no Convention right (including freedom of expression under Article 10) may be exercised in a way that aims to destroy other Convention rights. The OfS clarifies that speech meeting this “very high threshold” falls outside Article 10(1) entirely, and accordingly there is no duty to secure it.

Changes to the three-step framework

The OfS has also amended the three-step framework with the intention of helping registered providers assess whether restrictions on lawful speech are justified by reframing the relationship between step 2 and 3.

Step 2 now directs providers to “secure the speech” and, if they are “interfering with the speech in any way, go to step 3”. This means step 3 is now engaged whenever there is any interference with speech, even where the provider has taken reasonably practicable steps to secure it. The guidance explicitly acknowledges that “facts that are relevant at step 3 may already have been considered at step 2”.

The OfS has also amended some of the practical examples to illustrate this point and included a further one (example 24A).

Practical implications for registered higher education providers

In response to the free speech complaints scheme rules and updated guidance, we suggest that registered providers consider the following:

• whether they are advertising the complaints scheme in a prominent place as prescribed by the rules, which also contains the OfS’s suggested text about the scheme;
• ensure their decision-making reflects the updated OfS guidance and records explain why any restriction on speech is lawful, necessary and proportionate;
• prepare internal complaint and escalation processes so issues can be effectively addressed before reaching the OfS timescale threshold for complaints;
• ensure relevant staff are effectively trained; and
• continue to publicise and promote the importance of freedom of speech to reduce the likelihood of complaints materialising in the first place.

What should registered providers do next?

With the new complaints scheme due to open on 1 September 2026, registered higher education providers may wish to review their freedom of speech policies, decision-making processes and complaints procedures now. Ensuring that relevant staff understand the updated guidance and that appropriate records are kept of decisions affecting speech-related issues may help reduce the risk of complaints and place institutions in a stronger position should concerns arise.

If you would like to discuss the implications of the changes to the guidance or the new complaints scheme, our education team can help.

This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is not intended to address the circumstances of any individual or entity, nor should it be relied upon as a substitute for specific advice from a qualified solicitor. The information reflects the legal position as at the date specified and may be subject to change. If you require advice on a specific matter, please contact us directly.