Abolish the CRR

EVERY YEAR at about this time, Archie C, Epps III, dean of students, sends a letter to House Committee chairmen asking for nominations to the Committee on Rights and Responsibilities (CRR). For the past ten years--with only one exception--House Committees have responded with resolutions to boycott the committee.

But this year was different. Last week, Lowell House and the Freshman Council voted to end its boycott, and no one on the South House Committee, which last year called for the CRR to be abolished, objected to acceptin nominations.

We urge Lowell House, South House and the Freshman Council to reconsider their votes, and other houses not to select nominees.

The CRR was established in 1970 under the Resolution of Rights and Responsibilities to try student demonstrators involved in the spring 1969 strike. Clearly, its present use is limited, having heard no cases since 1975. But the CRR's vaguely worded charter leaves room for the violation of a student's right to political protest.

The CRR has the power to judge whether a student has shown "grave disrespect for the dignity of others," and to expel him on the basis of this subjective provision; it was patently designed to punish students who opposed University policies through political demonstrations.

The Faculty granted three reforms last year at the instigation of students in the Class of 1980, who broke the boycott in an attempt to reform the CRR from within. The CRR, however, still provides the students it tries no means of appealing its decision, except by asking the CRR itself to reconsider its decision. Nor does it admit hearsay evidence. Token reform can not alter the character of the CRR, which violates basic principles of legal justice.

The Faculty should abolish the CRR and repeal the Resolution on Rights and Responsibilities. All students should continue the boycott of the CRR.