As discussed Monday, 26 March 2007.

Whereas the UA Codes and Judicial Committee (hereafter, the CJC) has arrived at conclusions that state 1) the Judicial Administrator should remain independent 2) the UA should retain oversight over the Code of Conduct 3) A uniform judicial process should be retained for campus judicial proceedings; and

Whereas the CJC will further analyze the following issues in the next academic year: 1) procedural issues, such as the right to have counsel, sufficiency of evidence, right to remain silent, timeliness of process, appeal process, and emergency hearing boards. 2) clear definitions of violations and appropriateness of penalties. 3) structural changes and;

Whereas, according to the CJC report, “an overwhelming majority of community responses to the CJC expressed a fear of losing rights in the first three of these areas, and “feedback focused on opposing any reduction of the right to counsel and the right to remain silent, and any reductions of burden of proof” and;

Whereas a recent report commissioned by the Cornell Law Students Association also highlights the issue of student representation, right to remain silent, and the burden of proof as issues of serious concern to graduate and professional students;

Whereas both the Krause Report and input from the community are calling for a more understandable version of the Code of Conduct; and

Whereas there is no clear evidence that the delay of cases are caused by the current judicial appeal system;

Be it therefore resolved that the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly supports the findings of the CJC, including the independence of JA, the UA’s oversight over the Code of Conduct, and recommended uniform process for campus judicial proceedings.

Be it further resolved that we urge the maintenance of all the civil rights of the complainant and the accused in further CJC discussion of the new Code of Conduct.

Be it further resolved that we suggest adding appendixes to the Code of Conduct to explain the legislative terminologies and clear definitions of violations and appropriateness of penalties.

Be it finally resolved that this resolution be circulated to the Chairs of the University Assembly and the Chair of the Codes and Judicial Committee.

Respectfully submitted,

Xianzheng Kong
Member of University Assembly
Representative of Applied Economics and Management
March 2007