CITY LIMITS: What is harassment?

Last October, Douglas Hann, a junior at Brown University, celebrated his 21st birthday as most students do -- drinking and spending time with friends. But a Brown judicial board found his actions that evening to go beyond partying. The board ruled they were harassment. Hann's birthday celebration began a four-month long investigation at Brown, which ended in his expulsion. According to The New York Times, Hann yelled an an obscenity and the word "nigger" in a courtyard. But a witness told the Times that the comment did not appear to be directed at any person. Then, a student in a nearby dormitory opened his window and shouted "Keep it down," the Times reported. In response, Hann yelled "faggot," an obscenity, and "Jew" at the student in the window, the witness said. A disciplinary council of five faculty and administrators and five students determined that Hann's words violated Brown's harassment policies. They also considered the fact that Hann had a record of verbal harassment and that he was drinking at the time of the incident in assigning his punishment. Officials at the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Council on Education, who both track "hate crimes," said that this is the first known expulsion of a student for using "hate speech." Hann did not deny the charges, but refused to tell the Times either what he said during the incident or at the hearing. He added that the charges presented at the hearing were inexact. Brown's policy prohibits any behavior which causes harm to any persons or property, disrupts or shows "flagrant disrespect for the well-being of others." The Tenets of Community Behavior, which student's agree to abide by when they enter the university, defines harassment as "subjection of another person, group or class of person . . . based on race, religion, gender, handicap, ethnicity, national origin, or sexual orientation." It also prohibits "drug and/or alcohol related behavior." In a statement released last month, Brown President Vartan Gregorian said he could not comment on any specific case, but he explained what the harassment policy says and how it is applied. "The universities of our nation are and must remain sanctuaries for the exchange of ideas -- even unpopular ones," the statement read. "We cannot compromise on this principal . . . The university's most compelling challenge is to achieve a fruitful balance between respecting the right of its individual members to operate and speak freely in pursuit of the truth and fostering a climate of mutual respect and adherence to accepted community values and the standards of conduct." As the University examines its own racial harassment policy, many on campus said this week that Hann's situation hits close to home. For over a year students, faculty and administrators have debated whether punishments like Hann's are a First Amendment violation or protect people from physical or emotional harm. The University's current racial harassment policy stipulates that harassment must threaten or interfere with the victim's academic work or employment or create an intimidating or offensive environment. President Sheldon Hackney's October draft for a revised policy calls for a narrowed definition of harassment. To be considered harassment, incidents must pass a three-part test -- they must be intended to "demean, insult or stigmatize" a person on the basis of race; be addressed to the person or group it demeans; and make use of "fighting words" intended to incite violence or their non-verbal equivalents. Following severe criticism from students and faculty that the policy gives leeway to those intending to insult others rather than those who want to promote open discussion, Hackney decided in December to revise the draft. Hackney, who will present the revised draft at University Council in March, said last week that it is difficult to say whether Hann's actions would have violated University policies. He said that the news accounts of the incident do not give enough information about the exact circumstances of the case to "make a clear determination" about whether Hann's punishment was fair. Others who have been involved in the discussion of the harassment policy on campus said that while the University's policies are slightly different than Brown's, the issues faced by the two universities are similar. Physics Professor Michael Cohen, who initially pushed for a revamping of the University's policies, said this week that he could not judge Hann's case because he is not aware of the precedents on the Brown campus. But he said if the University expelled a student in a similar situation, he would protest the action because other "more serious acts of harassment" have gone unpunished here. "The Castle affair was the clearest example of racial harassment which has occurred on this campus or anywhere else," Cohen said. "If the perpetrators in that case had been white and the victim black, all the perpetrators would have been expelled and [the case] would have attracted national attention from all the media." Cohen said this is an example of how the University's policy is unevenly applied. Black Inter-Greek Council President Kathryn Williams said that the draft that Hackney submitted to University Council last fall will make it even more unlikely that a student who did something like Hann would be expelled here. "The University has such an aversion to labeling something as racial harassment," Williams said. She said the draft puts the burden of proof on minority students who are victimized because the victim must prove intent. Williams emphasized that the University must have both a working harassment policy and must adhere to it for minority students to be protected. Last week the ACLU announced that it will assist Hann in appealing his expulsion. But even after the appeal is heard and decided upon, debate over what should constitute harassment will continue.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.