UA debates judicial reform at meeting

Judicial reform was a topic of an hour-long heated debate at the Undergraduate Assembly's full-body meeting Sunday night. But UA Chairperson Dan Debicella, a Wharton junior, said afterwards he hoped members would not focus on ideological issues, but would rather take the most important part of the meeting home with them -- UA's support for student-based judicial reform. The UA voted on whether to back three specific issues regarding judicial reform at the meeting. Members of the Student Judicial Reform Committee took turns speaking out on the separate parts for which they were each responsible. College senior Beth Hirschfelder, the committee's co-chairperson, along with Sub-Committee Chairpersons and College juniors Wilton Levine and Ashley Magids, outlined a "skeletal" prototype of their proposed changes. According to Debicella, the most important of the proposals was one that would give the Code of Academic Integrity's Hearing Board three student voices instead of two -- the number of students currently sitting on the board. This proposal received sweeping support with a 19 to 0 vote. A crucial issue included in the Hearing Board proposal would allow the Board to make the final decision, and provide students found guilty with the opportunity to make appeals to the administration. "This is the heart and soul to the concept of a student judiciary system," Debicella said. "The important thing is the students deciding," he said. "We want students being the judges and not the administrators." Magids presented another proposal dealing with the issue of whether advisors should be allowed to speak at the hearings. After one pro and one con debate, the UA voted 15-6 in favor of the proposal. UA member and College junior Eden Jacobowitz supported the idea of advisors having a voice in the hearings. Formerly charged with racial harassment after shouting "water buffalo" to a group African American students in January 1993, Jacobowitz said students often lack the ability to defend themselves. "False things could be said about you and you don't know how to combat that," he said. Tension mounted at the meeting when the UA was faced with the issue of whether to prohibit students from hiring external advisors to defend them. According to Hirschfelder, the administration strongly opposes external advisors being brought into University judiciary hearings. UA member and College senior Dan Schorr disagreed with the administration's view about hiring outside lawyers. "I think the defense should be able to defend themselves anyway they want," he said. "The thing is, if you don't allow lawyers, no one can have a lawyer, but if you allow lawyers, it will help someone." Regarding the 11-9 outcome in favor of endorsing external advisors, Schorr said he thinks "that means that it was close, but more people thought it was a good idea than a bad idea."