Read on Twitter
Let’s talk about the adjudicatory panels in the proposed #CampusCompact and how they differ from those that deal with violations of the Honor Code or Fundamental Standard @Stanford. A thread: (1/n) https://www.stanforddaily.com/2020/08/13/an-appeal-for-appeals-in-covid-19-disciplinary-proceedings/
Stanford’s Honor Code and Fundamental Standard are the two value sets that guide Stanford’s disciplinary proceedings, covering academic honesty and community expectations (respect, non-discrimination, good citizenship). Potential violations of these are handled by OCS (2/n)
This Office of Community Standards under the Dean of Students deals with all aspects of the judicial cycle, from accusation to response to adjucation and sanctioning. Unlike with the HC and FS, the #CampusCompact Review Panels don’t appear to be under OCS purview (3/n)
Students who are accused of HC/FS violations (respondents) have a set of rights enumerated in the Stanford Judicial Charter adopted one 1997. Section IIA of this charter outlines the rights of respondents (4/n)
Rights of respondents to OCS include: being informed of charges and rights in writing, innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, confidentiality, no self-incrimination, access to all evidence, representation by counsel, a speedy determination of charges/verdicts (5/n)
Right to an open hearing in front of a judicial panel if charged, the right to call/cross-examine witnesses, protection from double jeopardy, right to appeal an adverse verdict, and protection from retaliation. These rights don’t exist for Compact Review Panel proceedings. (6/n)
Additionally, OCS judicial panels have a clear structure and reporting hierarchy. They report to a standing committee of students, faculty, and staff known as the Board on Judicial Affairs. Members are appointed by student govts, faculty senate, and Stanford admins (7/n)
In turn, this Board on Judicial Affairs is under the purview of the Dean of Students. As far as I can tell from the #CampusCompact text circulating, Compact Review Panels May refer cases to OCS, but report to no one (8/n)
If charges are filed in an OCS proceeding, respondents proceed to a hearing by a Judicial Panel composed of four students and two administrators. The bar for conviction is high: 5/6 must find the respondent guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, a high evidentiary standard (9/n)
Not only do Compact Review Panels have no defined composition, they have no standard for finding someone accused of violating the compact innocent or guilty. Further, “Stanford” (who??) “retains the right to remove any person from housing or the campus” (10/n)
Do we have a right to representation in front of these panels? To see the evidence? To even know what we’re charged of? Are we innocent until proven guilty, and if so, by what evidentiary standard? The #CampusCompact enumerates none of these as rights of the accused (11/n)
To conclude, the only thing the #CampusCompact does say explicitly is that all decisions are final, meaning we have no right to appeal. An opaquely structured panel working under cover of night with no accountability and no appeal? Sounds downright Orwellian to me (12/n)
Like a good, honest academic, I always cite my sources. Here’s a link to the Judicial Charter of 1997, for those interested: https://communitystandards.stanford.edu/policies-and-guidance/student-judicial-charter-1997#judicial
And here’s a link to what I could find of the #CampusCompact, which @Stanford has not shared directly with us. Thanks to @SBSA_official for compiling it. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PEGzmeTFb7xfRN2-qACdxm97okuw5ofJV_8FHIK25gY/edit?usp=sharing
