Sections

One for the price of two

Chang should not be tried under the Code

A multiplicity of disciplinary systems does not guarantee justice. It does not guarantee a more civilized society. It does not guarantee charged citizens a fair trial. In fact, an increased number of disciplinary systems will ultimately detract from the justice system as it stands in America today. The University adopted the Code of Student Conduct despite this.

Now Code officials must learn to recognize Code-appropriate situations. They must also recognize inappropriate situations and keep the Code from interfering where it does not belong. Such an interference will impede the state and federal courts in their legitimate pursuit of justice.

Such is the case in the current allegations facing Rackham student Kei Chi Chang, the man accused of stealing $100,000 in books and artwork from University libraries. It is not the first felony charge he has faced this year, or even this semester. Earlier in the winter, Chang was charged with aggravated stalking and harassing a female Eastern Michigan University student for more than a year. The felonies, which eventually were reduced to misdemeanors, were handled by state courts.

The University should allow the current allegations to be handled in the same manner as Chang's earlier charges. Administration officials will not say for sure whether Chang will be tried under the Code -- but Vice President for Student Affairs Maureen Hartford said that Code charges, if any, will be handled separately from the criminal charges. Chang could be punished twice for one crime.

The University's frustration with the alleged crime is justified. Chang possesses more than 560 books and many art reproductions -- literature he claims is his own, but the evidence indicates otherwise. The artwork and literature are rare and valuable, and University library officials are understandably upset. Donald Riggs, dean of University Libraries, said, "It might be impossible to reconstruct many of these volumes."

However, although Chang's alleged crime is disturbing and frustrating, the University still must step back and allow the courts to handle the issue. Unfortunately, administrative indications point to probable Code proceedings. With recent internal Code disputes and leadership troubles, the Code is currently not an effective tool for justice. Moreover, the lack of case precedents -- a substantial concern since implementation -- establish no solid ground on which to build a fair hearing. Given the current state of the Code, it should be kept far from cases that can be more justly tried in the state courts.

The University has a vested interest in this case. But the administration must not confuse a vested interest with a right to judgement. Interference in this case would be inappropriate. The case is set for trial in circuit court -- a place where guilt and innocence can more legitimately be determined. Determining justice is the courts' duty -- not the University's.