“SUNLIGHT is said to be the best of disinfectants.” These words were spoken by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis almost one hundred years ago, yet they ring equally true today. The American system of government has long relied on transparency to cure the evils of corruption and to uncover wrongdoings so they can be corrected. This transparency applies to almost all aspects of governance, from the White House to the county courthouse. Students at the University quickly realize, however, that there are still some places where this sunlight does not shine. While the honor system is understandably bound by the limits of confidentiality, it has the power to implement greater transparency. Only then will students truly believe that the Honor Committee has nothing to hide.
The current debate raging about the Committee centers on the balance between transparency and confidentiality. Critics of the system blame the Committee for refusing to comment on any cases and keeping the trials closed to all observers and media. Supporters counter that the Committee is bound by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which prevents schools from releasing the educational records of its students. As Honor Chair Jessica Huang said in an interview, “the policies of confidentiality are not in place in the interests of the Committee, but rather in the interests of the rights of the student.”
FERPA itself exists for obvious reasons. Even frequent Committee critic Sam Leven agrees that the Committee’s confidentiality is a plus in certain situations, since it “helps limit that damage that that guilty verdict does to your life.” For innocent students it is also clearly a positive trait of the honor trial process, since it prevents innocent names from being dragged in the mud.
Still, confidentiality has its price. Since most honor trials are closed to the public and even the press, which is quite rare in a democratic society like ours, members of the community are unable to monitor the system and the representatives they elect. All of this comes to a head when there are allegations of misconduct, like those contained in the Jan. 13 Cavalier Daily article, “Honor case highlights procedures.”
In that article, a former student charges that jurors fell asleep during her case, the trial chair was unaware of the basic rules, and that the opposing counsel was inappropriately accusatory and had to be reprimanded by the trial chair. Without any impartial, third-party observers to report on the trial, it is the accused student’s word against the blanket denials of the Committee, which refuses to address specific cases.
There are several ways to remedy this untenable situation. First, the Committee should stop hiding behind the FERPA requirements and instead merely abide by them. FERPA specifically allows the release of information which is not personally identifiable. Although there is an understandable desire to avoid costly litigation by interpreting FERMA as broadly as possible, the Committee’s duty is to its constituents, the students. Therefore, the Committee should comply with FERPA in every way, but ensure that whenever possible, available information is disclosed. The community could benefit greatly from this new information, even with the caveat that it be non-identifying.
The current practice of issuing “no comment” on all specific cases is one example of an unnecessarily restrictive policy. How does responding to allegations of whether or not jurors slept through a trial personally identify the accused student? Clearly it does not, yet Huang refused to respond to those exact allegations, pointing to the blanket policy of not commenting on specific cases.
There is a second potential reform which would create greater transparency while staying within the legal guidelines. Under this reform, students wishing to talk to media like The Cavalier Daily would be asked by the Committee to voluntarily sign a waiver of their FERPA rights. This type of waiver already exists, and the Committee’s bylaws state, “An investigated, accused, or dismissed student may waive his or her right to confidentiality at any time... by signing a written waiver for that purpose...” One of the main bones of contention regarding confidentiality has been the perceived unfairness of the accused student taking their case public, while the Committee is unable to defend itself. If all students are asked to signed this waiver, their acceptance would cause this inequity to disappear, while if the student refused to sign the waiver, it would then be quite reasonable for The Cavalier Daily and other news sources to refuse to publish allegations by those students.
Then there is a third idea, advocated by Leven, whereby The Cavalier Daily would be allowed to attend and report on trials as long as they did not release personally identifying information. There is even some precedent, as former Special Assistant to the Honor Committee Nicole Eramo explained, of “allowing any student to petition to the Vice Chair for Trials to attend” trials, although in the past they were bound to complete confidentiality and therefore could not report on the proceedings. This third solution is clearly the most radical, but also posses the most potential.
Although this final proposal should be adopted only after careful consideration by the Committee’s legal counsel, the first two suggestions are practically no-brainers. The Committee and its constituent students should take a break from divisive debates about the single sanction and try to implement some common-sense reforms that will improve the system. What is true during these bleak winter months is just as true with honor: a little bit more sunlight would be a welcome change.
Isaac Wood’s column appears Mondays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at i.wood@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
IYER: Sports stadiums should sport more benefit to Virginia residents
By Arjun Iyer | 9 hours agoPast stadiums in other states show that Virginia has the potential to succeed at such a construction project, provided that proper measures are undertaken.
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 4 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 6 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
