University of Virginia Library

Rules Referendum

Students at the University have proven
that they are capable of self-government
through the Honor System, and the time has
come for us to affirm the full responsibility
for our actions. The re-worked Standards of
Conduct take that step.

With several weeks of hearings and debate
behind them, the Ad Hoc Committee for a
Student Code of Conduct presents its work to
the student body today and tomorrow. While
retaining many aspects of the previous code,
which was drawn up over the summer by the
Administration, it makes several important
and needed changes.

A fifteen-point bill of rights has been
added, in which the Constitutional rights of
the students are re-affirmed. Such a section
was largely overlooked in the
Administration's version, for as they
scampered to provide order for the coming
year, they seem to have forgotten about the
law. It is strange that in the community of
Mr. Jefferson, the man who insisted that a Bill
of Rights be included with the U.S.
Constitution, such a document was absent
from the University's regulations.

The Ad Hoc Committee's bill is clear and
fair, including the rights: to exercise full
rights as citizens: to academic freedoms to
speak, inquire, to hear and be heard; to
participate with equal status in the
formulation of purposes and policies of an
all-University nature; to establish and operate
communications media free of any
censorship; to be free from harassment and/or
surveillance designed to harass; to privacy of
personal records and files; and to due process
in all hearing proceedings.

The rules themselves - now known as
"General Accountability" - have been
modified in several places to clear the
ambiguity and to protect the students. The
main change was in the expansion of point
three, clarifying "unauthorized entry" into
buildings: entering administrative or
residential facilities that are closed to use is
subject to discipline, while entry into other
facilities is subject only after "an appropriate
University official" instructs one to leave and
gives the opportunity to do so.

By discriminating between administrative
or residential facilities and others, the
committee wisely distinguishes "private"
sections of the Grounds President
Shannon's office, for instance from the
more "general" and accessible sections, like
Cabell Hall. Occupation of offices cannot be
tolerated, while occupation of less essential
buildings - although still in opposition to
necessary security on the Grounds - is not in
itself hampering to the working of the
University, and is subject to discipline only
after the occupants have been notified of
their violation.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly,
the dreaded provision for interim suspension
has been removed from the sanctions. In-term
suspension did nothing but provide for
punishment before conviction - a sot of
academical preventive suspension - and it
placed the burden of proof upon the accused.
Even from the viewpoint of security, interim
suspension only loomed as a catch-all for
those who had lost favor with the
Administration. In what instances, for
example, would the immediate suspension of
a student be needed in which the arrest of the
student would not? If a student intended to
bomb a building, or physically harm another
would his suspension stop him from his act?
And if a student was not going to take such
drastic actions, why would the security of the
University be impaired if the Judiciary
Committee met and considered the charges?

The final implementation and
interpretation of the sanctions would be in
the hands of the Judiciary Committee, and
the newly revised sanctions make it clear that
"no student shall be subject to suspension or
expulsion, except for academic deficiencies,
without a hearing before an appropriate body
composed of students."

The Ad Hoc Committee's work is clear and
complete, and it provides for both the
student's rights and the University's security.
We strongly urge every student to approve the
revisions, so that the Council may go before
the Board of Visitors with our solid support
and so that the Board may understand the
feelings of those who are most affected by the
entire affair. We need a conduct code written
and regulated by students, and today is the
chance to secure one.