The Sexual Assault Task Force’s unanimous decision to recommend the removal of students from the adjudication panels that would hear sexual assault cases is an appropriate strategy.
The fact is, many students are not equipped to handle, let alone issue judgment, on cases of this nature and severity.
Task force members have mentioned looking toward external experts, or those who have a background in the proceedings that follow a case of sexual assault.
It is hard to believe that students would be able to work at the same caliber if included.
No amount of training will be adequate, especially when compared to the skilled professionals who have garnered the necessary abilities to tactfully and successfully counsel in this area through their many years of experience.
This insufficiency of student training has also been evident in the removal of sexual assault cases from the University’s Honor Court due to questions arising on what the basis was for these cases falling under the jurisdiction of students to begin with.
This is not to say that students do not have valuable input when it comes to cases of violence, whatever its nature. Therefore, a student voice should be heard at some point in the process, whether this is through some sort of oversight or limited involvement.
The principle of student self-governance is still important and should remain intact — that is what sets us apart from many other institutions.
The University has already seen how students are not equipped to deal with sexual assault cases, no matter the amount of training, but it is still necessary that they remain in the process.
