The Civil Liberties Union of Harvard (CLUH) has proposed an overhaul of the Administrative Board's disciplinary process, arguing that the present system denies students due process of law and fails to educate the Harvard community.

CLUH, which has long been critical of the College's disciplinary system, will release its 17-page report today, providing 15 recommendations for improving the system.

But Dean of the College L. Fred Jewett '57, who chairs the Ad Board, said yesterday that many of CLUH's complaints have already been addressed.

Essential to the report are three recommendations:

. That students be allowed to appear in person before the Ad Board after having chosen their own representatives.

. That the Ad Board provide students with more information about the disciplinary process before the Board hears their cases.

. That the Board publish precedents of previous decisions, without naming the students involved.

Allan H. Erbsen '94, associate director of CLUH and the author of the report, said that while the Ad Board is generally fair in its decisions, its methods need to be changed.

"We don't think the Ad Board is evil, but its goals are wrong and they go about things the wrong way," Erbsen said.

Erbsen said that the closed nature of the Ad Board was not conducive to an open dialogue between students and administrators.

Jewett addressed several of CLUH's major complaints in an interview yesterday, saying they did not reflect the facts of current Ad Board policy.

For example, Erbsen called "coercive" the system of assigning tutors and advisers as students' "automatic advocates." The report criticizes the current practice of keeping students from Board hearings.

But Jewett said that under Ad Board policy, students can choose a representative if they are dissatisfied with their tutor or adviser.

"Students can now request someone else," Jewettsaid. "We've made that more clear in recentyears."

Jewett also said that in cases where probationor more severe punishment is a possibility,students are permitted to attend the hearings.

Published Precedents