Clint Roscoe ‘23
Staff Editor
Christopher Benos ‘22
Guest Writer
The Honor Committee is set to ratify a proposal for reform to UVA’s sanctioning system.
The proposed amendments to the Honor Constitution, proposed and authored by third-year law student Christopher Benos ’22, would reduce the sanction for students found guilty from expulsion to a two-semester leave of absence. They also expand the current “Informed Retraction” plea option, so that students may enter a guilty plea at any time prior to a hearing and take the same two-semester leave of absence.
UVA’s honor system was created in the 1840s in an attempt to reduce tensions between faculty and students. Though initially introduced by a professor as an academic certification against cheating, the students took custody of the Honor Code and undertook responsibility for its implementation. Throughout the system’s 170-year history, it has been entirely administered by the student body itself.
Today’s Committee is composed of more than two dozen students from various constituent schools across the University. The Committee processes cases, educates the student body, and implements policies designed to maintain UVA’s uniquely collegial “Community of Trust.” Its jurisdiction covers all acts of lying, cheating, and stealing, and its authority and purview are distinct from that of the University Judiciary Committee, whose jurisdiction covers non-academic violations of its general Standards of Conduct.
Under the current Honor System, students may, before being reported for an offense, submit a Conscientious Retraction, which means they accept full responsibility for their wrongdoing, make amends, and face no leave of absence. After being reported, students may submit an Informed Retraction within seven days and take a two-semester leave of absence. Students who do not submit either a Conscientious or Informed Retraction and are subsequently found guilty by a jury of their peers are punished with the “Single Sanction”: expulsion from the University.
For several decades, various Honor Committees have attempted to alter the University’s sanctioning regime. In 2013, the Committee successfully introduced the Informed Retraction, which for the first time permitted students to admit guilt early in the Honor process and avoid expulsion. Broader efforts to alter the Single Sanction have never succeeded, in part due to imprecise referenda and fractured campaigns.
This year, the Committee has pursued a coordinated legislative effort to amend sanctioning. Following extensive debate on a variety of proposed regimes, the Committee reached a broad consensus to focus reform on removing expulsion and expanding student rights under a plea. The proposed framework, authored by Christopher Benos, reduces the sanction for students found guilty at a hearing from expulsion to a two-semester leave of absence. It also expands the current Informed Retraction plea option to allow a student to admit guilt at any time prior to an official hearing and take the same two-semester leave.
Benos explained the merits of the proposal: “We cannot simply excise from the community students who make mistakes, especially since students come to the university from a wide range of backgrounds. To foster integrity, and ultimately cultivate honest and compassionate citizens, the University must help students learn from their mistakes. Students deserve a second chance.”
Practically, removing expulsion is designed to increase community commitment to the Honor System and reduce instances of jury nullification. Expanding the timeline for accepting pleas is designed to expand student access to evidence. As Benos explained, “currently, after a plea window has closed, new evidence becomes available, further interviews are conducted, and circumstances may evolve. An expanded plea ensures that students are able to make informed choices about their academic futures throughout the Honor process.”
In anticipation of alumni pushback, Benos explained that the proposed changes are consistent with the spirit of current policy. “We already allow students who take the Informed Retraction to return to the University after a two-semester leave.”
The Committee will ratify the changes in the coming weeks. Following ratification, the constitutional changes will be put to a university-wide vote in early 2022. In order to pass, the amendment will require the support of at least 60 percent of the votes cast, and at least ten percent of the entire eligible voting population must vote in favor. In the coming months, the Committee will finalize procedures under its bylaws that would take effect should the constitutional framework pass. It will also implement a coordinated campaign to partner with organizations like SBA and inform students ahead of the spring referendum.
---
car8ca@virginia.edu
cjb7ns@virginia.edu