The Undergraduate Council voted last night to continue sending a representative to a controversial group which advises Harvard's governing Corporation on issues arising from South Africa-related investments.

The move to maintain undergraduate membership on the Advisory Committee on Shareholder Responsibility (ACSR) came after months during which council members have said President Derek C. Bok has not done enough to curb his influence over the selection of committee members.

Last spring, the council voted to withdraw its representative to the ACSR after December 1 unless Bok acted to make the body's selection more democratic.

The 12-member advisory committee, which is comprised of alumni, faculty and students, has been criticized for not being representative of the communities it represents. Student delegates from the graduate schools have sometimes been selected by the deans of schools without formal student input, and council members have charged that the corporation retains excessive control of the selection process.

President Bok has countered these charges saying the ACSR is not primarily representative but rather serves an advisory function.

Council representatives last night said the council should maintain its ties to the ACSR because it was unreasonable to expect the the seven-man Corporation to adopt all the reforms the council spelled out last spring.

"They have illustrated that they are open to conversation and perhaps to engaging in productive change," said Brian R. Melendez '86, who headed the group which studied Bok's response.

The ACSR became a subject of intense scrutiny two years ago when it recommended that Harvard divest of it $400 million investment in companies which do business in South Africa. When the recommendation went unheeded, many charged the University with using the ACSR to divert sentiment for divestment.

Last year the committee reversed its position, coming out in favor of the University's stated policy of intensive dialogue. Under this policy, Harvard argues that it can most effectively influence developments in the apartheid state by maintaining its investments in companies that do business there.

In a report drafted last April, the student government criticized the Advisory Committee as unduly influenced by those it supposedly advises, arguing that Bok techniquely has final say over most delegates. Bok has said he does not actively exercise that control.

"The formal appointment of any member of the ACSR ought to lay outside the purview of the President and Fellows," states the lengthy report the council sent to President Bok last April.

The president responded in part to charges that he exercises undue control of the selection process by transfering control to a committee. "In order to ensure continued independence in the selection process, the appointments will be ratified by the Joint Appointments Committee of the Overseers and the Corporation," Bok's letter says.

According to a resolution endorsed by the 88-member council last night, this action does not adequately minimize the Corporation's role in the selection process.

"Yet the Corporation or an agent of the Corporation still appoints the same eight members as ever. The Joint Committee on Appointments is practically as much an agent of the Corporation as the President is. Even this connection ought to be broken," the council report says.

ACSR Secretary Jane B. Sherwin, could not be reached for comment.

According to council members, another area of concern is the selection of alumni representatives argue that too few alumni have been made aware of the committee, and the selection process is too closely reviewed by the administration.

According to the council report, the Corporation's stated committment to work with the Harvard Alumni Association and the Harvard and Radcliffe Clubs of Boston will not sufficiently open up the selection process.

The report of the council, which says "the selection process ought" to be as open as possible," criticizes the Corporation for not committing itself to "public and timely advertisement" of faculty or alumni positions on the Advisory Committee which may become available.

The council also voted to extend the term of its representative to the Advisory Committee from one year to two years, which is the tenure of faculty, alumni, and representatives from the various graduate schools