The Michigan Daily - Friday, September 23, 1994 - 3 Life under After more than a year, the interim student conduct guide still hovers over campus E n the home, parents rule supreme. In society, the legal system governs and sanctions its citizens. At the University, it is the code - the Statement of Students Rights and Responsibilities - that is paramount. The 18-month-old code is an interim series of guidelines that govern students' non-academic conduct. Any student action within a 30-mile radius of cam- pus can be sanctioned under the code. At the July Board of Regents meet- ing, the Office of Student Affairs re- leased a summary of statistics relating to the code. According to the statistics, since the code's inception: 9 150 students have been investigated under the code; - 95 have been formally charged; C 2 students have been expelled; 2 have been suspended; 8 24 served communityservice fortheiroffense; and, 3 housing leases have been terminated. Student groups, as well as one Uni- versity regent, have attacked the code, saying it limits due process and restricts student rights. "I don't see where the University is given the authority to contradict laws es- tablished by the U.S. or the state," said Julie Neenan, president of the Michigan Student Assembly. "That seems a little ridiculous: 'We at the University ofMichi- gan are going to teach you a lesson."' University administrators, however, remain its loyal defender, saying it pro- tects students by laying out clear-cut guidelines and sanctions. "When serious misbehavior occurs that can threaten the University, we have a responsibility to step in," said Univer- sity President James J. Duderstadt. Before the code, Regents' Bylaw 2.01 permitted the University president to sanction students. "I don't like to be Solomon," Duderstadt said. "With the absence of the code, the only authority we had was through direct presidential action." Without a defined code, the Univer- sity did not offer any guidelines for what actions could be cause for expul- sion. "Only the most egregious disciplin- ary problems could be addressed on campus," said Mary Lou Antieau, judi- cial adviser to the code. Regent Deane Baker (R-Ann Ar- bor), the only regent to vote against the instatement of the code, said he would like to see student conduct handled in the traditional presidential manner. He said an elaborate code is not necessary since the president already has the au- thority to handle discipline. "I think the code should be a very simple statement of the basic sense of how a student should treat one and } other," Baker said. "I think there is a direct relation with the less restriction on a student, the less burdensome it will be on the student." Although both Neenan and MSA oppose the code, they do not seek a return to unilateral presidential deci- sions. "You don't want it to be up to the discretion of one person," Neenan said. Under the code, students may choose between an administrative or a student hearing. Of the 95 cases tried under the code, 38 have been administrative hear- ings, while the student panel has heard only six. The rest were handled through mediation, are still pending or have since been dropped. Antieau asserted students often choose administrative hearing to expe- dite the process. "Some students do it because they frankly don't want anybody else in this world knowing that they've been in- volved in this process," Antieau said. At the beginning of each year, 50 students are chosen at random to serve as student jurors. If students cannot serve, they may apply for hardship fur- Myths on the Code IMYTH Students may choose not to serve on a student panel for the code. FACT Students are compelled to serve on the panel, but may be excused in individual cases. MYTh A woman's past sexual history is admissible into a code hearing dealing with sexual assault. FACT A woman's past sexual, history is not relevant to such a case. MYTH Attorneys may not be present during code hearings. FACT Students may consult with an attorney at any time, but the attorney may not speak for the client. MYTH On-campus murder is specifically mentioned under the code. FACT In an oversight, the code does not specifically In February, student jurors who attended the panel meeting agonize over the proposed amendments. Key Proposed Amendments to the Code The following is a list of some of the proposed amendments to the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities. I Criminal matters and off-campus violations will not be prosecuted under the code, excepting offenses that directly endanger the University community. Attorneys may represent and speak for students during the code hearing. ® Students have the right to an open hearing when sexual assault or harassment is not charged, even if a student complainant wants the hearing closed. Students may be charged with an off-campus offense U Suspensions shall be lifted for a person found innocent in a court of law. ® The code represents the only non-academic student sanctions with the exception of housing and professional degree policies. 0 The judicial adviser may only expunge data that reveals the identity or addresses of the students involved. U In addition to students, organizations may face group sanctions under the code. only after they are found guilty in a court of The code will remain an interim policy until at least April, the Board of Regents decided at a meeting last February. Until that time, MSA, the Senate Advisory Committee on University Af- fairs (SACUA) and others will work on preparing amendments to the code. Amendments may be proposed through these governance bodies, any University executive, the panel consist- ing of student jurors or a petition signed by 500 students. After the proposal, the amendments are sent to the student panel - which must have at least 26 of the 50 student jurors present - for review. The stu- dent panel may approve any proposal with a simple majority. Any amendments passed by the stu- dent panel would go to the Board of Regents for consideration. At the last 'It really sets up a court system and I'm really not comfortable with the University judging every action of a student.' - Regent Deane Baker Republican, Ann Arbor through the code. But, both Neenan and Baker said that is exactly what the Uni- versity has done. Baker said he thinks it is unfair for students to face both criminal and Uni- versity sanctions. "It really sets up a court system and I'm really not comfortable with the University judging every action of a student," he said. Neenan shares a similar view. "It's such a double whammy - some people are being tried in regular court ... and being tried at the University," she said. In response to such concerns, through SACUA, the Civil Liberties Board pro- posed an amendment that would limit the code to cases not being tried in the crimi- nal court unless the action immediately endangers the University's safety. Green said he shares the worry that students face double jeopardy - in the courts and at the University. "I don't think there should be separate Univer- sity courts of law unless there are ex- tenuating circumstances." Even a student found innocent in a court of law may still have to serve the code's sanction, Antieau said. She said the code has an appeals process and that a student cleared of criminal charges may file for a new code hearing. "Our evidentary standard is differ- ent and our purpose is different," Antieau said. "In other universities where this has been tested in the courts, they have upheld the right of the university to proceed administratively even if the outcome was different." Many students also worry about the jurisdiction that the code covers. Any offense within a 30-mile radius of campus may result in sanctions under the code. "Why is the University trying to monitor behavior that does not affect the University," Neenan asked. Antieau asserted that the outside ra- dius is necessary because of "the crazi- ness of our campus structure." The cam- pus is divided in many areas. The 30-mile radius was chosen as matter of practicality, Hartford said, not- ing that the University cannot compel non-students to testify at the hearings. "Thirty miles, it is reasonable to as- sume that people would come 45 min- utes to an hour to make a statement. If you got much beyond that we would start losing students' access to people who could make statements in their de- fense," she said. Another proposed amendment to the effect for an individual had cover on-campus to be our highest priority murder. Instead, it is and it would be so com- covered by assault with plex to add organizations intent to cause physical to that." injury. However, Hartford did MY TH not rule out the possibility The student panel must of including groups in the find an accused student policy. guilty beyond a Neenan said the inclu- reasonable doubt. sion of groups in the policy FACT would simply be more of a The evidentary standard bad thing. "You cannot dis- under the code is "clear count individual responsi- and convincing." bility," she said. MYTH Although Neenan said A student found innocent she realizes that the code in a court of law is not is probably now a perma- required to serve their nent part of the Univer- code punishment. sity, she added it is neces- FACT sary to make some revi- Students found innocent sions. in a court of law may "A willingness to com- appeal the code promise, a willingness to decision. However, the work together and be fair decision may not be about things would be a overturned and the very good step in the right student will need to direction," she said. complete the sanction. Neenan added that stu- dents need to become more aware about the code and its impact. "I think a lot of people think the code doesn't affect them, and that's where the problem is." Both regents and Duderstadt said they are ready to listen to any changes the student panel puts forth. "I don't think the policy will ever be cast in stone. I think as the nature of the campus changes, the policy changes," Duderstadt said. Regent Rebecca McGowan (D-Ann Arbor) said she is not ready to consider the amendments without the approval of the student panel, even if obtaining a quorum continues to be a problem. "I don't think you want the Board of Regents getting into it at that level," she said. "This is something that needs a lot of input from the people who are affected." 'U' guards code records from public examination The code may be one of the University's best-kept secrets. The University believes the tran- scripts from hearings under the State- ment of Student Rights and Responsi- bilities are private student records, under the provisions of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Mary Lou Antieau, judicial adviser for the code, said facts from the hearings may not be discussed. "That's a violation of the state- ment and the privacy act. Anything that happens in a hearing is closed," Antieau said. "Both the complainant and the accused are supposed to honor that." In an attempt to supply information on the code, the University originally released a redacted transcript of the code hearings. But a series of articles in The Michi- gan Daily linked the hearings with pub- lic criminal records of the incidents. The articles published the names of the individuals involved, prompting the University to change its policy. The University now prints code records in an abbreviated form. Regent Deane Baker (R-Ann Arbor) said the synopses do not sound very useful, although he has not yet seen the new summaries. "They certainly have to protect the individuals," Baker said. "On the other hand, they have an obligation to dis- close as fully as they can." Antieau said unless the incident is sexual in nature, the complainant does not receive information about the sanc- tion. "They just get the outcome. The per- son is held responsible for violating the statement or not responsible, but they're not told what the sanctions are unless it's necessary," Antieau said. She noted, however, that in instances such as stalking, she would need to tell the complainant the sanction. The Board for Student Publications, which oversees the finances of the Daily, the Gargoyle and the MichiganEnsian yearbook, maintains the code hearings are not subject to the non-disclosure requirements of FERPA. In a Jan. 26, 1994 letter to the student panel member, board co-chair Joan Lowenstein provided the posi- tion of the board on the privacy of code records. "It is the Board's position that charges, hearings, and sanctions im- posed under the (code) are disciplinary in nature and therefore not subject to the non-disclosure requirements of FERPA," Lowenstein wrote. "In fact, 1992 amendments to FERPA clarified Congress' intent to exclude disciplinary records from the scope of the Act, espe- cially when those records are compiled by university policy as the University of Michigan's Department of Public Safety." amendment hearing, only 18 of the nec- essary 26 juror quorum attended; there- fore the panel could not pass any pro- posals on to the regents. MSA, the Office of Student Affairs, SACUA and two student groups have each submitted amendments to the code. Proposals put forth by MSA and SACUA would allow attorneys to repre- sent students at the hearing. Under the current guidelines, students only may use attorneys for consultation during the case. Neenan said she feels the policy is unfair, because students who choose not to speak for fear of incriminating them- selves are left without representation. "If you choose not to speak, you cannot have someone speak on your behalf," she said. Daniel Green, chair of the Senate Assembly's Civil Liberties Board, said the right to an attorney is necessary because of the lack of legal safeguards in the code's hearing system. "We think it's essential that a stu- dent be represented by an attorney if the student wishes," he said. Vice President for Student Affairs Maureen A. Hartford defended this as- Bylaw governs faculty behavior Students are not the only ones who face University sanctions when they stray from the straight and narrow. Faculty members charged with wrongdo- ings are subject to disciplinary hearings under Regents' Bylaw 5.09. The bylaw covers crimi- nal matters as well as other offenses such as breach of academic integrity or false employ- ment and promotion applications. There has only been one such hearing in the recent past. In 1983, the University found a professor responsible for sexual harassment and terminated his tenure. The case was up- from the University. "We are independent and we can take our own actions," said Kay Dawson, assistant to the provost. She added that the University has a differ- ent standard of evidence than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in the judi- cial system. The information must be "clear and convincing" to lead to a removal from the University, which is the same guideline that apply to students under the code. Elsa Cole, general counsel for the Univer- sity, said even though hearings under the by- law are rare, that does not mean that the