A previous post here defended (1) having university authorities investigate accusations of on-campus date rape and impose university discipline, whether or not the complainant chooses to pursue criminal charges, and (2) imposing discipline on a standard of proof something short of “beyond reasonable doubt.” That still seems right to me.
But Nancy Gertner’s careful analysis of Harvard’s new policy shows that complaints about procedural unfairness toward the accused in such cases are sometimes very well founded. Under the Harvard system, the accused has one week to respond, no right to call witnesses or cross-examine, and only a limited right to legal representation, while the accuser has unlimited time and assistance The university officials in charge of enforcing rules against gender discrimination act as investigator, judge, and jury, and their findings of fact are unreviewable. Can you say “kangaroo court”?
Gertner also shows that Oberlin’s policy does the same job much better.
Putting the adjudication of such charges, and the review of the performance of the campus officials who manage the process, in the hands of on-campus Â Title IX compliance officers and Title IX administrators at the Department of Education is a recipe for disaster.Â