Editorial: Sexual assault clause needs elucidation

The UCLA Student Conduct Code’s description of the protocol for handling reported instances of sexual violence is hard to grasp and should be revised to ensure that students who have been assaulted or harassed have a full understanding of their options.

Currently, policies regarding sexual violence are scattered throughout the conduct code. The code’s longest section, which traces how UCLA investigates, resolves and sanctions violations of the code, encompasses all misconduct, from plagiarism to sexual violence. The code does note certain exceptions for cases involving sexual violence – for instance, spectators are not allowed at conduct hearings.

However, lumping sexual violence with all other forms of misconduct is problematic. Policies regarding sexual violence should all be grouped in one section. The conduct code, as it stands, muddles how UCLA deals with sexual assault, against a climate in which survivors may already be reluctant to report an act of sexual violence.

Further, since the process UCLA uses is fundamentally different from that of the criminal and legal systems, the difference between the two warrants special clarification by the university.

Under Title IX, passed in 1972, it is illegal for public education institutions to discriminate based on gender. One potentially confusing stipulation of Title IX is that sexual assault, rape and battery are all classified under the term “sexual harassment,” according to a statement from Debra Geller, executive director of community standards in the Office of the Dean of Students. In the legal system, which most students are more familiar with, sexual assault is separate from harassment.

Title IX also requires that the university go through separate proceedings than the court system, and take interim steps to protect the victim even before the criminal investigation is complete.

Moreover, a college must take action if there is a “preponderance of evidence” against the accused, instead of the standard used in court, “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The university should post a visual depiction, such as a flow chart, that explains these differences within the conduct code on the website that houses the code.

Further, the university must make this information easily accessible. Right now, there is information under sexual harassment links on the Office of the Dean of Students’ website, but some victims of sexual violence may not know that those links pertain to them.

UCLA just began the process of reviewing the Student Conduct Code, and we urge administrators to pay extra attention to whether the code lucidly explains sexual violence policies.