Whereas, the Judicial Oversight Committee was convened on May 4^th, 2010 with the passage of Resolution 45-86 “Convening of the Judicial Oversight Committee,”

Whereas, the Committee consisted of Megan Braun, ASUCI President, and Avinash Sharma, Rules Committee Chair, who were selected to represent the Executive Cabinet and Legislative Council respectively, and Jeremy Dircks, Judicial Board Chair, Curt Brown, Judicial Board Vice Chair and Sandy Winslow, Executive Director of Student Government,

Whereas, the Committee met twice, once on May 11^th and again on May 18^th,

Whereas, the Committee has thoroughly discussed the matter in dispute and arrived at a conclusion,

Let it therefore be resolved that Legislative Council review and acknowledge the following statement as the official conclusion of the Judicial Oversight Committee:

The Judicial Oversight Committee has reviewed the issue presented in Resolution 45-86 “Convening of the Judicial Oversight Committee,” which called for a review of the actions of the Judicial Board. The legislation alleges that the decisions in these matters constitute “a violation of the jurisdiction of the Judicial Board as outlined in the ASUCI Constitution because the Judicial Board is literally approving and disproving legislations rather than simply ‘reviewing’ them as is stated in Article VI, Section B, Subsection 1.” The Judicial Oversight Committee has determined that the Judicial Board is endowed with the authority to nullify legislations. However, the Committee also recognizes that it is neither fair nor practical for the Judicial Board to both initiate cases and then adjudicate them. Therefore, the Judicial Oversight Committee recommends that ASUCI create a position, entitled Student Advocate General, which shall be responsible for initiating cases when legislation or an action of ASUCI is considered to be in violation of the ASUCI governing documents. Furthermore, the process for initiating cases should be revised to provide greater clarity. To this effect, the Committee has drafted potential revisions for both the ASUCI Bylaws and Judicial Board Policies & Procedures, which the Legislative Council is advised to enact with all possible haste.

With regards to the three specific legislations in question, R45-61 “Revisions to the Elections Code, ”R45-65 “TGIF Bylaw Revision,” and R45- 66 “Resolution Condemning Academic Repercussions for Non-Violent Protest,” the Committee has deemed the issue to be moot. Both R45-61 and R45-65 were approved with the condition that the amendments not take effect until after the Spring 2010 ASUCI Elections. The Elections have concluded so both amendments are considered to be in effect.  And with regards to item R45-66, the Judicial Board has since decided not to take action on the legislation. However, it is to be understood that henceforth the Judicial Board shall not have the authority to nullify legislation unless a case is initiated by a student filing a “Petition for Hearing.”