Senate
Subject: Minor Amendment to
Ordinance XVII (Conduct and Discipline of Students)
Origin: Secretary to Student Discipline Committee
In
addition to the proposed amendment to Ordinance XVII referred to in Paper
SEN09-P34, Senate is asked to approve the following minor/housekeeping
amendments, which are intended to make more clear the terminology used to
describe allegations of misconduct under the terms of Ordinance XVII, and to
avoid any confusion with Ordinance XXXVIII (Student Complaints Procedures).
The
proposed amendments are as below:
4. Action by the University pending disciplinary procedures or prosecution
(i) A
student who is the subject of a complaint an allegation of
misconduct may be excluded by the relevant authorised officer from use of the
Library, computing facilities, residential accommodation or specified
facilities within an academic department, and by the Chief Operating Officer
from other University premises, on a temporary basis pending disciplinary
action where the authorised officer or Chief Operating Officer considers that
the student is likely to reoffend in the immediate future and/or represents a
risk to other students, staff or to property. The student shall have the right
to make representations to the authorised officer or Chief Operating Officer
before the decision is implemented when circumstances permit. However, when the
exclusion is regarded as a matter of urgency, representations may only be
possible after implementation of the exclusion.
…
(iii) A student who is the subject of a
complaint an allegation which may constitute a Major Offence or
against whom a criminal charge is pending or who is the subject of police
investigation may be suspended or excluded by the Vice-Chancellor on the
recommendation of the Chief Operating Officer, in accordance with Statute V(4),
pending the disciplinary hearing or the trial. Suspension should only be used
where exclusion from specified activities or facilities would be inadequate.
The student shall have the right to make representations to the Vice-Chancellor
before the decision is implemented when circumstances permit. However, when the
exclusion is regarded as a matter of urgency, representations may only be
possible after implementation of the exclusion.