Resolution 17-13: APPEAL YE! APPEAL YE!

print back

Number	17-13
Description	Having more Hearing Officers for Student Conduct hearings and change in policy.
Authored by	Yash Singh Jay Hinge
Sponsored by	Jackson Airhart
Date Submitted	Friday, March 24, 2017
Date Considered	Tuesday, August 29, 2017
General Body Vote	Thursday, January 1, 1970
Committee	Other
Result	n/a
Remarks	The Student Senate believed this resolution will greatly benefit students who wish to appeal the selection of a Student Conduct hearing officer for their hearing as the current policy states that the hearing officer will be the sole judge of their objectivity. With what this resolution is asking, a third party will be able to judge whether or not a hearing officer will be biased during the conduct hearing.
Whereas	Students are treated fairly and their cases are heard in an appropriate manner by the Office of Student Conduct; and
Whereas	The appeal process is available to students who are found guilty of the charges levied against them; and
Whereas	There is only one judge who is chosen randomly by the Office of Student Conduct to preside over the hearing process; and
Whereas	This may result in a biased decision-making process because of the staff prosecutor's experience in handling such cases; and
Whereas	In the 'Student Conduct and Discipline' Policy guidelines provided by the Office of Student Conduct, in the "Impartiality of the Hearing Officer(s)" under the 'Policy' section, it is stated that "The Hearing Officer(s), shall be the sole judge of whether he or she can serve with fairness and objectivity"; and
Whereas	Submitting a challenge of the officer's impartiality to that very officer beats the purpose of neutrality.
Be It Further Resolved That	The office also looks into making amends to the "Impartiality of the Hearing Officer(s)" section in the "Student Conduct and Discipline" handbook. We recommend creating a neutral body for challenges to a hearing officer's impartiality