The founders of the student-run Office of Judicial and Academic Advocacy (OJAA) have expressed dismay over new clauses in this year's edition of the Rights and Responsibilities manual, which allegedly limits the role of advisers during University Board of Student Conduct hearings.According to Justin Gelfand '05 and Josh Sugarman '05, who founded the OJAA four years ago, the restriction drastically limits the amount of support advisers were able to offer accused students in past years.

Last year, a section of Rights and Responsibilities read: "The accused student and/or his/her adviser shall have the right to question all witnesses and to view and question all evidence presented to the board during the hearing."

But the revised clause states that while advisers may view and question evidence, the accused student is now the only one allowed to question witnesses. Another stipulation reads that an adviser can only provide "passive assistance."

Shawn McGuirk, the director of Student Development and Conduct, said this means advisers can only pass notes to accused students during hearings and occasionally raise questions.

Gelfand and Sugarman said that last year, the OJAA always strived to advise accused students in the best way they saw fit-whether that meant questioning witnesses or remaining silent throughout most of the hearing.

Gelfand said that McGuirk, who helped to update Rights and Responsibilities this semester, has prevented advisers from protecting students' rights.

"The only places where advocates are muzzled are third-world courtrooms and Brandeis," Gelfand said. "Put that in perspective."

McGuirk said advisers should not represent students. He said too many advisers have impeded the judicial process, making hearings last longer than necessary and appear more like a courtroom trial.

But Gelfand said that if a hearing takes 10 additional minutes and makes the accused student feel as if justice is being served, there is no harm done. He said he realizes hearings are not court cases, but that consequences can be very serious.

McGuirk said that while advisers were previously able to question witnesses and present evidence in writing, he expected that, in actuality, they would act in a passive manner.

"This was not happening," McGuirk said, referring to advisers domineering conversation in hearings. "An adviser by definition means you are advising someone else. It doesn't mean you are representing or advocating for someone else."

Sugarman also said that accused students are intimidated by professors and administrators who file charges against them. He said he and Gelfand also created the OJAA to help represent students in this capacity.

According to Sugarman, he spent years trying to understand the specific definition of each possible infraction. In the past, he said he could tell the board why a certain charge made against one of his clients could be nullified. Now, he said, a client has the only option of reading from a piece of paper.

McGuirk said students are adults and should be able to respond to questions asked of them. He said he has no problem if an adviser wants to ask a question or two. But he said that the accused is the party directly involved in the process, not an adviser.

"The board is trying to get as much information as they can," McGuirk said. "We are not looking for the setting to be disruptive. We are not looking necessarily for the setting to be argumentative. We want people to be as comfortable as they can be in a hearing."

According to Robert Sherwood, the dean of Student Development at Boston College, advisers are allowed to attend judicial hearings, but they cannot actively participate in them.

"[Advisers] are not allowed to address the board or act in any advocacy capacity," Sherwood said.

An online description of Wellesley College's judicial system states that faculty and student life administrators may act as advisers in helping to provide support for the charged student. But the adviser is not allowed to attend hearings or act as a formal advocate.

Sugarman said while the OJAA did not necessarily prevent more students from being punished, the organization made the whole judicial process more effective.

"We have made a lot of real progress," Sugarman said. "It's unfortunate because this really blows us back.