 |
|
Legislation targets
judicial affairs reform
Authors concerned with lack of due process
on campus |
David Forbes
SGA Beat
|
Jacque Lenz | The AppalachianLegislation sponsors Paul A. Funderburk,
Ian A. Mance and H.
Dustin Bayard take questions from SGA senators Tuesday evening.
|
The Student Government
Association passed a bill Tuesday evening aimed at altering the
rights of students brought before a judicial board at Appalachian
State University.
The bill, which passed by a large majority, seeks to change the
amount of evidence required to convict, to allow a student’s
representative to speak on their behalf and to require the board
be unanimous in its decision.
“We wrote this bill because we’re concerned
with the lack of due process in Judicial Affairs right now,”
off-campus senator Ian A. Mance, one of the authors of the bill,
said. “Depending on what you’re going to Judicial Affairs
for, you could end up getting kicked out of school. If there’s
so much on the line, I think we should make them prove their case.” |
Judicial
Affairs and the Student and University Judicial Boards that operate
under it decide the penalty for students accused of violating the
Student Code of Conduct.
Currently, Judicial Affairs only requires a simple majority of the
members present at a hearing to convict a student and does not allow
the person chosen to assist the student to speak on their behalf
or to examine witnesses.
Judicial Affairs also operates under the standard of “a preponderance
of evidence,” meaning the student has to be found as more than
likely to have committed the violation than not.
The bill would change the standard of evidence to “clear and
convincing evidence,” meaning it would be highly probable the
charge is true.
Mance said multiple students have come to him with complaints about
being wrongfully convicted by Judicial Affairs, and he personally
knew others who had had the same problems.
Some senators expressed reservations about aspects of the bill.
“I really feel students’ rights when they come before
Judicial Affairs should be improved, but I think requiring a unanimous
vote is a bit extreme,” East Residence Hall senator Howard
R. Schreiber said.
“I’m concerned that if a unanimous vote is required, a
single student could just vote ‘not guilty’ on every case
that came through,” off-campus senator Justin W. Moore said.
Neither Moore or Schreiber voted against the bill.
“If unanimous is good enough for our legal system, we shouldn’t
want any less,” off-campus senator H. Dustin Bayard, one of
the authors of the bill, said.
“I don’t really think that will be a problem. Our issue
isn’t with Judicial Affairs, but with how it’s run.”
“The process for selecting board members would probably screen
out members who would simply vote ‘guilty’ on everything,”
off-campus senator Paul A. Funderburk, the third author of the bill,
said.
Mance and Bayard said they had spoken with members of Judicial Affairs
and gotten positive responses about changing the rules.
“We’re supposed to act in the interest of all students,
even those who break the rules,” Mance Said. “We need
to make sure their rights are protected and should make Judicial
Affairs absolutely have to prove their case before taking that student
away from us.” |
|
|
 |
 |
