Queen's University is the only known post secondary educational institute in North America to have a peer based judicial system for non-academic violations of conduct. What this means, in plain English, is that instead of having a university administrator making decisions on non-academic code of conduct violations, that decision is instead given to the students, who in effect, govern themselves. The University determined at one point that having a university administrator the decision maker in such situations would be more risky, such a person could be out of touch with the reality of the situation or not have the understanding of underlining factors that a fellow student could. As such, authority was granted by the Senate to the Alma Mater Society and the Society of Professional and Graduate Students to uphold and enforce non-academic code of conduct issues via the AMS or SGPS Judicial Committees. Given that the MCRC (and the JRHC for West Campus, Graduate and Harkness) have a unique understanding of residence and a better ability to act within, the MCRC is authorized to enforce non-academic discipline issues within residences in lieu of the AMS or SGPS.

To learn more about the AMS Non Academic Discipline system, please visit their website for more details: Commission of Internal Affairs - Non Academic Discipline

To learn more about the Senate policy governing non academic discipline, visit the Senate website: Non Academic Judicial System at Queen's

The MCRC system is based on a Report, Follow Up/Investigate and Sanction system whereby a residence staff member first documents a perceived infraction and that documentation is then passed on to a Residence Facilitator for follow up and investigation (and sanctioning if applicable).

There are a number of staff members, employed both by the MCRC and the University, who work to manage the non-academic discipline system in residence:

Vice President (Discipline)

This elected student oversees all aspects of the peer-based judicial system in residence from the Residence Facilitators he or she directly supervises to the advisory boards and reporting to the AMS on related issues.

Dons

Dons are hired by the Residence Life department of Queen's Residences and given their numbers, are the most likely to document a situation which may be a violation of standards. However, please note that any residence staff either employed by the MCRC or Queen's Residences, can document a perceived violation. It is also important to note that dons do not sanction an individual, this responsibility is left to the Residence Facilitator.

Residence Facilitators

The DF is employed by the MCRC, which is student run and paid for by students and thus he or she is your peer. Once a DF gets documentation of an incident, he or she will follow up with the named students and perform an investigation of the incident. If a violation is determined to have occured, the DF will classify the incident and determine an appropriate sanction. If the incident is classified as a level two offence (see below), then the final decision regarding the sanction is determined by the Peer Judicial Board, although the Residence Facilitator will typically make a recommendation to the PJB (more information below).
See the Representation page for information on contacting your Residence Facilitator.

Residence Judicial Advisor

The RJA is a full time staff member employed by the University to provide guidance and year-over-year advice to the players above. Given that the RJA is a full time staff member, he or she can provide historical perspective on an issue. Nevertheless, the RJA simply provides help, support and guidance but does not make decisions on violations or sanctions, as stated, that is the responsibility of the Residence Facilitator or the Peer Judicial Board.

In order to have a safe and effective living and learning environment for all students living in residence, the MCRC and Queen's Residences partnered together to define a set of Community Standards for living in residence. These standards seek to insure that all students can live happily and peacefully with each other in a safe environment. The sanctions that may result are divided into three categories, levels 1 through 3, and are as defined below. For more information about the standards and appropriate sanctions, you are highly encouraged to read the Residence Guide, available from the Queen's Residences site: Community Standards in Residence

Level 1

Defined as Actions by an individual or individuals that interfere with another resident's peaceful use and enjoyment of his or her space in residence. Possible sanctions include a written warning, a bond, or a fine among others.

Level 2

Defined as Actions by an individual or individuals that have a significant negative impact on another resident; actions that endanger the safety and security of the perpetrator or others in residence; actions that undermine the dignity of another individual; or actions which result in damage to University property. Sanctions include a bond or fine as in Level 1 (although the amount will be higher) and an educational sanction among others.

Level 3

Defined as (i) offences of a serious nature that are not expressly Level one or Level two offences, (ii) complex behaviour (e.g., behaviour that may not be disciplinary in nature and may or may not constitute an offence under the Residence Community standards complicated by other significant factors) requiring the intervention of Residence Life and/or the University. Note that due to the complex nature of these offences, they are handled by the Director of Residence Life, an employee of the University. You do, however, still have the same rights and privileges that you would have with Level 1 or 2 offences, including the right to representation and the right to appeal.

The PJB is made up of students currently living in residence, some with experience in the peer-based judicial system and some without. Should you be named in a Level 2 infraction, you will be asked to appear before the PJB along with the Residence Facilitator who investigated the case. You can avoid appearing before the board if you agree to the sanction(s) offered by the DF beforehand. The DF will then have the sanctions approved by the PJB. The PJB could however choose to offer more or less sanctions depending on the circumstances. Should you ever wish to appeal a decision made by the PJB (for Level 2) or a Residence Facilitator (for Level 1). Your appeal will be made to the Appeals Coordinator and an Appeals Committee will be convened to hear your case. Your DF can provide you with information on how to submit an appeal.

This board is designed to provide advice to the Vice President (Discipline) on issues relating to discipline, most often involving the updating of ambiguous, unclear or misunderstood rules. It is typically made up of students-at-large, some staff from the MCRC itself (such as a Residence Facilitator) and some dons, although it's specific composition changes year over year. If you have suggestions for rule updates or changes, you're encouraged to contact the Vice President (Discipline) who is the official representative of all students on the board (since he or she was elected by students). The Vice President can be contacted at details above (in The Players).

The Discipline Working Group is a subcommittee of the Senate Residence Committee (which is itself a subcommittee of the Senate) and has a similar mandate as the Judicial Advisory Board. The difference lies with its composition. The DWG is made of up representatives from Residence Life, both residence councils and a student representative. Along with considering keeping the rules up-to-date and easily understood, the DWG also concerns itself with recruitment and administrative efficiencies with the discipline system in residence.