Judicial charter changes do not include JIO split

Newly-proposed changes in the University's judicial system do not include splitting the Judicial Inquiry Officer's job in two, despite the urging of several student groups. The Undergraduate Assembly and the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly called in the spring of 1990 for the University to create a "prosecutional" JIO and a "settlement" JIO. At the time, students said the system makes it uncomfortable for students to negotiate settlements with the same person who could use any admissions of guilt in prosecuting them. The students' request came as three Provost's committees began reviewing the judicial system, the Code of Academic Integrity and the University's Open Expression regulations. An oversight committee reviewing the work of the other three committees released its recommendations for revising the policies this week. The proposals include minor changes in the Code of Academic Integrity and Open Expression policy and reject the request for breaking up the JIO. "The only controversial aspect of my committees work [was splitting the JIO]," Stephen Burbank, a law professor and chair of the committee on the judicial system, said yesterday. "It split along faculty-student lines. It was a question of whether the JIO should continue to settle cases and be the prosecutor [in those cases]. The students wanted splitting, and the faculty were not in favor. We're not splitting it." The introduction to the report released this week states that the changes "made the document acceptable to the student members who had vigorously objected to the previous version." But, student committee member Elizabeth Hunt said last night she did not agree with the changes. "Professor [David] Pope [chairperson of the Oversight Committee] is saying that the changes take care of the question of splitting the JIO," said Hunt. "This does not make the document acceptable to me, and furthermore they didn't ask me. I still feel the students were short-changed." The report, printed in this week's Almanac, is still open to comment and change. It will eventually go before University Council for approval. The non-binding report also eliminates what Burbank said was a never-used procedure that allows students charged in the judicial system to opt to go to the Vice Provost of University Life instead of the JIO. The other changes in the judicial system make revealing information on pending cases a punishable offense. The report added that any person who leaks information could be charged by the University. The committee also suggested that the judicial system be reviewed by the Provost every five years. The report by the Committee on the Code of Academic Integrity contains three major changes from the one released in April 1990 -- it adds policies on confidentiality and reports that are virtually identical to those sections in the judicial charter; it specifically tells students they can go to the Ombudsman instead of the JIO; and emphasizes that the Code of Academic Integrity is distinct from the judicial charter. The report gives a specific list of actions which are regarded as violations of the code. According to Pope those are the only things which constitute violations, and anything not on the list is not a violation. The report also recommends that professors be allowed to punish cheating by the grade given in a class. "The instructor now has the explicit option of awarding a punitive grade based on cheating," Pope said. "The respondent can appeal but the faculty always has final say in awarding grades." The report also explicitly states the sanctions for violations. Only one major change was made to the Guidelines on Open Expression, Pope said. In the section which defines where and when the policy applies, a clarification of "University location was added." The addition reads: " 'University location' designates: 1) The campus of the University; 2) Any location owned, leased, or used by the University, when used by members of the University community; and 3) Areas immediately adjacent thereto." The only other changes were modifications of the language used in the report, Pope said.

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