Bias Checks - practices and procedures
Practices and Procedures
The Student Judicial Charter of 1997, states, in part, the following about the composition of a Judicial Panel:
Section III.C.1. d, "The Judicial Adviser will endeavor to select Panel members who are not acquainted with either the reporting party or the responding student."
Section III.C.1. e, "The Judicial Adviser will ensure that no Panel member is biased or has a conflict of interest in a case being considered. Both the reporting party and the responding student may request the removal of Panel members who they believe are biased or have a conflict of interest."
Section III.C.1. d, "If a Judicial Panel member discovers that they have a conflict of interest, or a perceived conflict of interest in a case being considered, they may withdraw and be replaced."
Initial Bias Check by Reporting Party and Student: Once a hearing date has been set, the Judicial Advisor will give the charged student the names of the potential panelists. This usually happens during the student's hearing preparation meeting, which should take place at least 10 days prior to the hearing. However, the student may ask the Judicial Advisor at any time to see a list of all current panelists,to be given an opportunity to check for possible bias or conflict of interest, and to ask that one or more panelist(s) not be seated on the case, stating the reasons why. The reporting party is also entitled to see the list of potential panelists and to request that one or more of them be excused from that case, stating the reasons why.
Bias Check by Panelists: A week or so before the hearing, the panelists receive a confidential communication listing by name but not by role in the proceedings every possible witness, including the reporting party, the charged student, third party witnesses, and personal adviser(s)/support person(s). Each panelist must affirmatively respond to the Judicial Advisor, stating there is no recognizable bias or conflict of interest, or giving a brief explanation why there may be a perceived or actual bias or conflict of interest. A panelist may opt to excuse him/herself from that panel, or be excused by the Judicial Advisor. The Judicial Advisor also may consult with the reporting party and/or charged student with respect to a panelist's response, and ask for their comment on the issue.
Bias Check at the Hearing: After the reporting party and the charged student arrive for the hearing, the Judicial Officer will show them, again, the names of the panelists for that case, and ask them to confirm their satisfaction with these individuals. At the start of the hearing, after introducing the reporting party and the charged student to the panelists, the Judicial Advisor will again request confirmation that no disqualifying concerns have been expressed following this visual identification of the parties and the panelists. NOTE: Should the charged student elect to participate in the hearing via telephone conference call or by paper filings alone, then the student will, in effect, be waiving the opportunity for a visual bias check. The student must discuss any concerns with the Judicial Advisor and make any special arrangements at least 7 days prior to the date of the hearing.
The Board on Judicial Affairs has advised the Judicial Advisor that the following practices and procedures with respect to bias checking are appropriate:
The Judicial Advisor will hear any concern raised about potential bias or conflict of interest given for a specific panelist. Whoever raises the concern, whether the reporting party or the responding student, must offer, in confidence, a sufficient explanation to the Judicial Advisor about the concern. It is the Judicial Advisor's responsibility to assess the potential bias or conflict of interest and determine if the panelist should be excused. The information provided to the Judicial Advisor will not be shared with the Panel or with the Judicial Officer.
The provisions about bias and conflict of interest described in the Charter must not be construed so widely as to eliminate broad categories of panelists. In accordance with the University's Nondiscrimination Policy panelists may not be excused solely on the basis of sex, race, age, color, disability, religion, sexual orientation, or national and ethnic origin. It is also not reasonable to claim, for example that all graduate students, or all students from a particular major would be unacceptable without giving reasonable cause for each individual in question. Such claims will be rejected by the Judicial Advisor, who is responsible under the Charter for determining whether bias or conflicts of interest exist.
Requests for inclusion of a panelist with a specific area of expertise will be considered and accommodated whenever possible given the constraints of the Judicial Panel Pool.
*ALL OF THE ABOVE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE BOARD ON JUDICIAL AFFAIRS, ON MARCH 4, 2004, AND AGAIN ON MAY 13, 2004, AS APPROPRIATE FOR POSTING ON THIS OFFICE OF JUDICIAL AFFAIRS WEBSITE*
Please call (650) 725-2485 with any questions or requests for additional information.