For Individual Students & Recognized and/or Registered Student Organizations:
The Office of Student Conduct and Community Standards (OSCCS) is responsible for receiving, processing, determining jurisdiction, and overseeing the investigation and adjudication of hazing reports for individual students and registered student organizations (including fraternities and sororities) on the Ithaca campus, the Cornell AgriTech campus in Geneva, NY, and on the Cornell Tech campus in New York City. OSCCS follows the Student Code of Conduct Procedures to ensure the University’s response to reports of hazing is prompt, fair, and impartial from the initial response to a report to final resolution. Reports of any alleged violation of the Code can be resolved through either the Alternative Dispute Resolution Process or Formal Complaint Process (see below for more information).
Alternative Dispute Resolution Process: The Code aims to foster a system that prioritizes accountability, education, and the growth of students as responsible community members. Procedures in the Code enable the Director to handle many Reports (or Formal Complaints) in a flexible way to address the alleged misconduct promptly and, where appropriate, in a manner emphasizing education, restorative justice, and rehabilitation. At any time, the Director may also recommend that the parties explore restorative justice opportunities, alternative dispute resolution and/or for any Respondent to undertake voluntary alcohol or other drugs (“AOD”) screening, education and prevention programming, rather than continuing under the Formal Complaint process.
Formal Complaint - Investigation Process: In cases where a Formal Complaint is initiated, the OSCCS will gather information regarding the allegations through a thorough and comprehensive investigation. During the investigation, a trained investigator will gather information from the parties and other individuals who have relevant information, as well as relevant available evidentiary materials (e.g., physical evidence, documents, communications between the parties, and other electronic records and media) as appropriate. All witnesses (including the Respondent and Complainant) are interviewed privately and will not appear in the same room during the investigation. The parties will have the opportunity to review and comment on the information gathered by the investigator prior to the investigator finalizing the investigative report and record. Both parties will receive a copy of the investigative report and record simultaneously. In addition, in cases where the Respondent is a registered or recognized student organization, the investigator may exclude the identity of a student witness and redact information that would allow student witnesses to be personally identified, where the investigative determines it is necessary to protect a student witness from retaliation. OSCCS is invested in protecting the privacy of any student who is concerned about their safety and well-being and has put in place protocols to honor this commitment.
Hearing Process: Findings of responsibility and determinations regarding sanctions and remedies for all Formal Complaints are made through a hearing process conducted by a five-member Hearing Panel and a non-voting Hearing Chair. The hearing is intended to provide all parties with a fair opportunity to present relevant information and to enable the Hearing Panel to make informed decisions regarding responsibility and sanctions/remedies. In cases where the Respondent is an individual, the Respondent is presumed “not responsible” unless and until a Hearing Panel finds the Respondent responsible for prohibited conduct under the Code by a majority vote using the clear and convincing standard of proof. In cases where the Respondent is a student organization, the Respondent is presumed “not responsible” unless and until a hearing panel finds the respondent responsible for prohibited conduct under the Code by a majority vote using the preponderance of the evidence standard. If the Hearing Panel does not find the Respondent responsible for any prohibited conduct under the Code, it will dismiss the case. If the Hearing Panel finds that the Respondent is responsible under the Code, it will consider appropriate sanctions and remedies. Formal Complaints can also be resolved outside of a hearing via the Alternate Resolution process, where the Complainant and Respondent can reach a mutually agreeable outcome in lieu of a hearing.
Sanctions and Remedies: When a Hearing Panel finds a Respondent (either an individual and/or an organization) responsible, the Hearing Panel is responsible for deliberating on and selecting sanctions and remedies by a majority vote. The Panel Chair may support the deliberations but may neither express views on the merits, nor vote on the outcome. In determining sanctions and remedies, the Hearing Panel will consider the following:
the severity of the prohibited conduct,
the circumstances of the prohibited conduct,
the impact of the prohibited conduct and sanctions and remedies on the Complainant,
the impact of the prohibited conduct and sanctions and remedies on the community,
the impact of the prohibited conduct and sanctions and remedies on the Respondent,
prior misconduct by the Respondent, including the Respondent’s previous disciplinary record at Cornell University and, if known, other disciplinary records or criminal convictions,
the goals of the Code and the Procedures,
the Respondent’s malicious or deliberate intent to harm another person, and,
any other mitigating, aggravating, or compelling factors.
Sanctions and remedies for individual students may include one or more of the following:
measures similar in kind to the interim measures specified under these Procedures, appropriate educational steps (such as alcohol or drug education, reflection exercises, counseling, or directed study), community work, restitution to the Complainant, fines of not less than $20 nor more than $500, restrictions or loss of specific or all privileges at the University for a specified period of time, oral warnings, written reprimands, oral warnings, written reprimands, disciplinary probation for a stated period of time, deferred suspension, suspension from the University for a stated period not to exceed three years, or dismissal (i.e., expulsion) from the University.
Sanctions and remedies for student organizations may include one or more of the following:
- measures similar in kind to the interim measures specified under these Procedures, appropriate educational steps for organization members (such as alcohol or drug education, reflection exercises, counseling, or directed study), community work performed by organization members, restitution, fines of any reasonable and appropriate amount, restrictions or loss of specific or all privileges for the organization at the University for a specified period of time, written reprimands, disciplinary probation, (i.e., a change to the organization’s recognition or registration status with the University that may include limitations on permitted activities), suspension from University recognition or registration to operate for a stated period of time. The Hearing Panel may also recommend that the organization be required or permitted to petition the appropriate University office for return after a stated period of time. A minimum of a three-year suspension is required for (1) hazing violations that include coerced alcohol or other drug consumption, sexual and related misconduct or other forms of violence or mentally abusive behavior that poses a threat to health and safety; and (2) violations of risk management and social event policies, rules or regulations that pose health and safety risks, including but not limited to facilitating, allowing, or requiring underage alcohol consumption, insufficient event monitoring/controls, or failure to register an on- or off-campus events where alcohol is present. Dismissal, (i.e., permanent rescission of permission to operate on University property) and/or termination of the organization’s agreement and relationship with the University.
Appeal Process of a Hearing Panel Decision: Both the complainant and the respondent may appeal a decision of the Hearing Panel to a three-member Review Panel chaired by the nonvoting Review Panel Chair. Appeals will be based solely upon the hearing record. If the Review Panel reverses a finding of not responsible, the record on appeal will be supplemented with the parties’ Impact/Mitigation Statements. The appealing party commences an appeal by submitting a written statement to the Director within ten business days of service of the Hearing Panel’s decision. The Review Panel will issue a timely written decision, typically no later than thirty business days after receipt of the non-appealing party’s submission or the time for submission has expired. The decision is final and binding on all parties. The decision must be by a majority vote of the Review Panel and will include the rationale for the Review Panel’s decision and any dissenting opinion.
Transparency of Violations: Additionally, all student organization, group, or team hazing violations (found responsible for violating the Code) are posted on Cornell University’s hazing.cornell.edu website and in the University’s Campus Hazing Transparency Report.
For Varsity Athletic Teams:
The OSCCS manages all individual conduct cases that may involve Varsity student athletes and collaborates with Athletics as needed regarding individual accountability and responsibility. Criminal behavior is reported to law enforcement for external proceedings, concurrently with campus sanctioning.
While the Student Code of Conduct does not have jurisdiction over Varsity athletic teams, as opposed to individual student athletes, the Cornell University Athletics department subscribes to the same definitions of hazing as outlined in the Cornell University Student Code of Conduct, which is reinforced through the Student-Athlete Handbook. Athletics, in collaboration and consultation with the OSCCS, is responsible for investigating and adjudicating varsity athletic teams alleged to have engaged in hazing, including determining and administering team sanctions, and managing appropriate follow-up for team-based hazing reports.
Varsity athletic team sanctions are determined based on investigation and in consultation with OSCCS and can include:
- Verbal and/or written reprimand/warning, including probation
- Harm repairing action
- Individual reflection
- Additional training/education
- Suspension from practice or games
- Suspension from all athletic privileges
- Dismissal from team
- Cancellation of season
Transparency of Violations: Additionally, any Varsity athletic teams’ hazing violations are also posted on Cornell University’s hazing.cornell.edu website and included in the University’s Campus Hazing Transparency Report.
