Committee to begin review of honor code

Last night the honor committee kicked off a period of revision and public self-examination by proposing an amendment to the honor code constitution meant to clarify its procedures.

The amendment — which the USG will vote on at its meeting during reading period — resolves "simply a wording issue" in the constitution, according to committee clerk Justin Browne '01.

The existing constitution dictates that a student suspected of an honor code violation choose a "defense adviser." This position can be filled by either of the two committee members investigating the allegation after those members decide — following consultation with the committee chair — there is sufficient evidence to hold a hearing. In practice, during the past three to four years, the defense adviser has served only as a procedural adviser — a role outlined in the constitution, Browne said.

"It's written here and it says 'defense adviser,' but they don't do that and they can't do that," Browne said. "It's very misleading."

"The only way a student can appeal [an honor committee conviction] is on procedural issues," he noted, adding that the language therefore leaves an "accountability" hole in the constitution. Because of the wording, convicted students have not been able to successfully challenged their punishments, he noted.

The USG was receptive to the amendment, which requires approval from three-quarters of voting senate members. Browne said the entire honor committee, nine of whom must also approve the amendment, agreed with the proposal.

"You can't really logistically have an investigator serve as a person's defense," Browne explained after the meeting, adding that accused students can now have a defense advocate of their own choosing at the hearing but not during the investigation.

The amendment is just the beginning of a process of "taking a look at the Code and making sure students understand it and that it is the fairest code possible," Browne said.

He also indicated that he could not disclose all the future proposals to reform the code that are under consideration by the committee. If the plans are made public, "then people will expect us to do it," he said.

One of the proposals, he added, was to increase the number of faculty advisers to the committee. While student representation is transient, these faculty members provide "institutional memory," he explained.

Browne said the honor committee is also considering asking the administration, the faculty and the USG to expand the committee's jurisdiction to take-home and online examinations — which the discipline committee currently governs.

Also during the meeting, U-Councilors Teddy Nemeroff '01 and Ryan Salvatore '02 were chosen to serve on both the USG and the U-Council executive committees after nearly one hour of deliberations closed to the public.

Get the best of ‘the Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

USG president PJ Kim '01 also praised this weekend's Ivy Council Conference, a gathering of student governments from the eight Ivy League institutions, that he said successfully served as a "clearinghouse for information."