The Undergraduate Council is likely to withdraw the undergraduate representative to the Advisory Committee on Shareholder Responsibility (ACSR) next week because President Derek C. Bok has refused to reform the advisory group.

The council, which last spring issued a lengthy report suggesting changes in the 12-person student-faculty-alumni body, late last month received a two-page response from Bok which council Chairman Brian C. Offutt '87 called "inadequate."

The council's report on the ACSR primarily called on Bok to relinquish veto power over representatives selected to the ACSR and to make the body more democratic and accountable to the members' constituencies through elections. Currently, widely varying bodies either elect or appoint alumni, student and faculty representatives, and faculty and alumni appointments are subject to Bok's approval.

Offutt said the council voted last spring automatically to withdraw their elected representative if Bok's response proved unsatisfactory. He said the council Committee on Investment Responsibility will probably decide on Monday to call back its delegate.

The Faculty of Arts and Sciences in 1982 granted the council the duty of appointing the undergraduate representative to the ACSR, which makes non-binding recommendations to the seven-man governing Corporation on ethical issues surrounding the investment of Harvard's $2.5 billion endowment.

The council report followed an earlier and broader series of recommended reforms, to which Bok generally responded without commitment, Offutt said. The more recent report told Bok the council would pull the undergraduate representative unless he acted on the proposed reforms by December 1.

Bok devoted most of his most recent response to the issue of selecting ACSR members, writing that he does not play an active role in selecting members, even though he reserves the right to overrule any appointments made to the group. Bok wrote, "I trust that [my] actions are in accordance with the spirit, if not the letter, of the Undergraduate Council report."

Bok also said he favored the ACSR's present structure, and did not, on the whole, intend to adopt the council's recommendation of requiring elections to make the members accountable to the contituencies from which they are chosen.

Offutt said, "He writes as though he is committed to the spirit of democracy, but his actions are not. There is no reason why he can't statutorily remove himself [from the selection process]."

Offutt and Brian R. Melendez '86, the former council chairman who prepared the two reports, said Bok had failed to act on many other specific concerns raised by the council as well, including the council's request that graduate student representatives from Harvard's 10 schools be elected through the applicable student government, as undergraduates are through the council. At most graduate schools, deans now appoint student members.

They said the process for selecting faculty and alumni is also lacking since Bok has not formally relinquished control of the appointments, has not required elections through appropriate governing bodies and has not provided a way for interested faculty and alumni to gain nomination to the board. Currently, deans of Harvard's schools and the Harvard Alumni Association nominate members to serve on the ACSR.

Bok has enacted on only one of the council's recommendations. He agreed to issue more frequent progress reports and make ACSR proceedings available to the community, Melendez said.

ACSR and Activists

The ACSR, created in 1972, has been involved in formulating Harvard's much-protested policies toward South Africa-related issues, and has been criticized because its members rarely decide to deviate from the Corporation's policy of investing in companies doing business in that country.

Breaking with a long tradition, the ACSR two years ago voted that the Corporation totally divest of such stock for ethical reasons. Last year, however, it reversed itself, deciding instead to help Harvard refine its present investment policy.

Many students, including some council representatives, have charged that student, faculty and alumni members may be selected because they oppose divestment or because they know little about the issues surrounding Harvard's investments. They argue that a democratic selection process would seat members who care about investment responsibility and who faithfully represent their constituencies.

Bok has countered that a democratic selection process would make the body "political and not advisory." He has said that the group was designed only to offer varying perspectives on investment responsibility, not to represent constituencies.

A recently released review of the ACSR by an ad hoc committee of the Board of Overseers, Harvard's secondary governing body, echoed Bok's views. The report, prompted in part by Undergraduate Council criticism, substantially supported the ACSR's design and praised its effectiveness.

Theodore Chase '34, a former alumni member of the ACSR and an author of the Overseer report, said yesterday that the council's criticism of Bok is "silly. The president does not make appointments himself, but without exception approves the appointments of students, faculty and alumni. The president must reserve power over appointments; what else is a president for?"

"Certainly the council's [with-drawal] will not reform the ACSR, and it will just go on without an undergraduate representative," said Chase