What does ACJC mean in CAMPUS

All Campus Judicial Council (ACJC) is a group of students, faculty and staff that work together to provide a fair, equitable and timely process for resolving alleged violations of the University's Student Conduct Code. The ACJC reviews alleged violations in student cases and makes recommendations to the University President or designee for action. The ACJC also provides guidance to staff responsible for enforcing the Student Conduct Code, monitors trends in student misconduct cases, and makes recommendations to improve enforcement of the code.

The All Campus Judicial Council is a non-partisan body composed of representatives from across campus life who serve three-year terms. These individuals are members of faculty, staff, and undergraduate and graduate students who serve as chairs or hearing officers during student conduct hearings. The Council meets four times per semester to discuss pending cases, review appeal decisions, develop policy related to student conduct issues, and advise on other matters related to the administration of justice at the university.

An All Campus Judicial Council Hearing will be conducted in accordance with procedures outlined in the Student Conduct Code. Hearings are chaired by either a faculty member or staff member who has been trained on how to interpret and enforce student conduct regulations. Hearings may include witnesses, documents, reports and other evidence submitted by both parties. At the conclusion of the hearing, all parties will have an opportunity to present closing statements before a decision is rendered by either a single chairperson assigned by ACJC or an entire panel of chairs appointed by ACJC depending on severity of case.

A formal appeal may be filed within seven business days after receiving written notice of an original disciplinary decision if any of these reasons apply: substantial new evidence not reasonably available when decision was first rendered; procedural error was material enough to affect outcome; sanctions imposed were severe enough that they effectively deny due process; sanction imposed are so disparate when compared with similar cases as to raise reasonable doubts surrounding their validity; any other relevant mitigating factor.

Yes, representation is allowed at hearings convened by ACJC but it must follow procedures stated in university’s legal counsel office 5-400 series policies pertaining to Advisor/Representative participation during proceedings. It’s important for neither party representing themselves nor being represented speak out of turn during proceedings while another person has floor.

While primary responsibility within judicial matters lie with ACJC their jurisdiction isn’t limited solely within those realms – they also directly interact with university departments & entities which leads them into areas like consultation & advisement as well make necessary recommendations which may further enhance its operations.

Matters concerning potential violations under Student Conduct Code such as allegations regarding harassment or bullying may appear before judicial council for review along with less serious infractions like disruption of class activities or cheating during exams.

No, not every case necessarily requires a full blown hearing before proceeding ahead with possible sanctions – rather it could take form different shape like informal resolution where both parties involved agree upon making judicial council aware & putting pen on paper about binding agreement thus avoiding drawn out procedure.