President John Hennessy recently approved a new pilot program in Judicial Affairs designed to increase privacy and timeliness in sexual assault cases. The program will be in effect from now until December 2011, and the Board of Judicial Affairs will reconsider it that quarter. The culmination of a year of struggle to reform the system for handling sexual assault cases has indeed paid off. The Edit Board applauds Judicial Affairs and President Hennessy for making a proactive move to fix some of the core problems in the sexual assault hearing process.

Of the changes taking effect under the new program, perhaps none is more important than the move toward private hearings in which the alleged victim and the accused will be separated. By moving away from open hearings and into separate, private hearings, the pilot program hopefully will help close the gap between incidents reported and cases actually filed. The stark contrast between the actual number of incidents on campus and those that go through Judicial Affairs has been troubling in the past years. By giving the alleged victim greater privacy, while still allowing him or her to submit questions for the accused, the process of submitting a sexual assault case may finally be cleansed of the atmosphere of fear and confrontation that in the past may have led many victims not to pursue their cases.

The new process also expedites and makes more efficient the role of Judicial Affairs. The hearings will involve a panel of four members, all of whom will receive training in the area in order to serve both the victims and accused. Furthermore, the new 30-day requirement for a case to be constructed will ensure that justice comes without delay and cannot be bogged down by bureaucracy. The average time for a case to be completed in the last year was 19 weeks–a grueling and painful stretch of time for the panel members and, more importantly, for the victims, who were forced to wait to have the conflict resolved.

This new pilot program helps to meet students’ demands for a more efficient and less intimidating system for dealing with sexual assault. As the pilot launches, the University is poised to consider whether or not it should be mandatory. The strongest argument for mandating the use of private hearings is the very real possibility that the accused may request an open hearing simply to publicly embarrass an alleged victim. The new program takes leaps forward in promoting an environment where victims feel more comfortable and confident in seeking justice. With the launch of this pilot program, the Editorial Board urges that the new process be mandatory so as to ensure that real victims of sexual assault are never dissuaded from seeking justice due to fears of public exposure or a prolonged ordeal.