Subject: Re: Computer file privacy at McGill U. in Canada

From: [email-masked] (Carl M. Kadie)
Date: 25 Sep 1993 19:20:16 -0400

McGill University proposes martial law.

It proposes:
1) that the disciplinary committee be given authority to look at all
   evidence to decide if it should be allowed to look at that evidence
2) that only the disciplinary committee, but students, be allowed to
   get advise from any lawyer (currently both can)
3) that the dean be given authority to summarily suspend students for 30 days
4) that privacy protection be removed from personal communications and
   (presumedly files) if they happen to be on a computer.

It sounds as though a student got "away with it" and the school blames
the inadmissibility of some personal communications archived on a
computer. These proposals will certainly make sure *that* never
happens again.
    * Without a lawyer's advice, students won't even know when their privacy
      is illegally violated by the school.
    * With the committee looking at material to decide if it should
      look at it, privacy will be a legal fiction, the school will
      likely to determine that more extensive privacy violations are
      permissible, even in admissible material will likely influence
      the disciplinary process.
    * With privacy protection withdrawn from personal communications
      that happens to be on the computer, students will have less
      privacy.
    * With authority to summarily suspend students for 30 days, students
      will be punished without due process.

The price of a fair and practical disciplinary system is that that
guilty will sometimes avoid just punishment. The price of McGill
University declaring martial law will be that the innocent will be
subjected to unjust punishment.

Given this choice between efficiency and fairness, I hope McGill
chooses fairness.

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent EFF; this is just me.
 =[email-masked], [email-masked] =