Missing the Point

LAST WEEK THE FACULTY COUNCIL sent a tentative proposal for a new student-faculty disciplinary committee back to the drawing board. Several members of the council expressed concern that procedures for determining the proposed committee's jurisdiction in specific cases were too vague. The procedures are not just vague--they are fundamentally flawed. There simply cannot be one prosecutory body for "routine" offenses and another for charges that are controversial or arise in the course of political activities. Whether one student or 20 are involved and whether they have the support of the community or not have nothing to do with holding a fair hearing.

For over a year now University officials have been trying to formulate a plan for an alternative to the Vietnam-era Committee on Rights and Responsibilities (CRR). It is disappointing that they have realized nothing more profound during this arduous process than that the name of the infamous body must be changed.

Recourse to a fair disciplinary body is necessary for all students. Especially considering the Administrative Board's closed procedures that offer students few formal protections, a new appeals body for all sorts of cases would be welcome. A committee with student representatives, which observes explicit protections of due process and which gives students the right to an open hearing, would protect students' rights regardless of the extraneous circumstances of the charges brought against them. But unless such a new disciplinary committee is an appeals body, it will fall into the same trap that mired the CRR in controversy over questions of legitimacy.

The alternative to an appeals board is no new disciplinary body at all. If, however, University officials are unwilling to create a new body with appropriate powers and procedures, they can not just sidestep questions of fairness. The Administrative Board should receive the same sort of scrutiny and reevaluation that has been focused on the CRR for the last two years.

Change comes slowly at Harvard, if at all. By drawing out decisions over many years, the administration can count on the lack of institutional memory among the annually reshuffled student body. But the demand for an end to inquisitorial bodies aimed at political protesters has been loud and clear for over 15 years. The time is long overdue for a body that will do justice to the community's concerns.