Quad Trio Nix CRR Delegates

The three Quad houses Sunday added their names to the list of houses refusing to send student delegates to the Committee on Rights and Responsibilities (CRR).

Cabot and North Houses decided to refuse the university's request for student representation because they question the legitimacy of the controversial body. Currier House decided to postpone making a decision until the Faculty Council, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences 19-member steering body, looks into reforming the CRR.

The Faculty Council last week announced it would not reform the disciplinary body this year, despite earlier predictions that the review would be completed this spring.

Before that announcement, Adams, Dunster, Lowell, and Mather Houses decided to boycott the CRR, while Cabot, Dudley, Eliot and Quincy Houses opted to defer decisions until the Faculty Council's review was completed.

Because of the Faculty Council's decision to wait until next year to finish its CRR review, Cabot, Dudley, and Quincy House committee chairmen said they would reintroduce the question of how to respond to the university's invitation into the house committees. What the other houses will do in the wake of the Faculty Council's recent decision remains unclear.

The college's invitation to students this spring to serve on the CRR was the first such request in six years, except for an ad hoc invitation last May, when the body was revived to hear the cases of 18 students involved with two anti-apartheid protests.

The six boycotts mark the first time in recent memory that students have chosen to boycott the committee on a large scale. Last year, Dunster and Mather decided to boycott the CRR, and the other houses voted to postpone a decision because they said they were not given enough time to gauge student opinion of the Vietnam War-era disciplinary body.

Quad Roundup

For the Currier House Committee, the decision was not whether to boycott, but whether to send a student representative before the FacultyCouncil has completed its review, said housecommittee Chairman Karen Bergreen '87. Thecommittee voted 22-18 against sending a delegate,she said.

Bergreen said students in favor of sending adelegate argued that "by not sending a delegate,you're not doing anything constructive." She saidthese students felt that the presence of studentson the CRR could mitigate the powers the committeemight abuse.

But the committee decided to postpone adecision pending CRR reforms. Bergreen said thatwhile the Currier House Committee approved of "theidea of the CRR, a committee that provides dueprocess," committee members felt that "thisparticular committee was not how it should be."

North House's decision to boycott "was morethan just a case of increased awareness," saidHouse Committee Chairman Steven Gleason '87. "Inpast years people weren't as informed and asconcerned about the CRR."

Gleason said that his house committee had hadspecific questions about the legitimacy ofstudents participating in the CRR and the mannerby which they were selected.

"We wanted to stay away just to show we weredissatisfied with it," said Gleason. "We're notsending delegates in terms of convincing theadministration that something further has to bedone."

Cabot House chairman Lori E. Lesser '88 couldnot be reached for comment yesterday