Firing back at the administration, expelled studetns Laith Marouf and Tom Keefer filed a complaint about the administrarions handling of their banning.
The complaint was made against rector and vice-chancellor Frederick Lowy, vice-rector services Michael Di Grappa and security guard Eric Abrams.
Marouf and Keefer said in their letter to Sally Spilhaus, an advisor at the
rights and responsibilities office that Lowy had denied their rights and their right to due process.
Di Grappa and Abrams were charged with harrassment, threatening and violent conduct and with interfering with the work that was going on at the CSU offices at the time of the incident, on July 20.
According to Marouf, Spillhaus rejected their complaint because they were not considered students.
“This proves that the officer of rights and responsibilities [Sally Spillhaus] is not doing her job and was biased in her decision. She is just repeating what the rector is telling her to say,” said Marouf.
On Aug. 31 Concordia University said that they were seeking an independent fact-finder in the exclusion case of the two students.
“This is not a response to the complaint, that the two banned students made to the office of rights and responsibilities,” said Dennis Murphy, the executive director of communications.
In a press release the university said that the fact-finder would be someone that is independent and impartial and that would review the facts that led to the exclusion decision. The fact-finder would be provided with all relevant material and invite submissions from the two excluded students.
“I think it is a total white-wash,” said Keefer. “This fact-finder proves that
rector Lowy does not know the facts. Not only that, it is highly irregular that someone would do something like this. We would only consider the fact-finder if he or she was truly independent and made a decision about the expulsion.”
Nonetheless, Lowy said in the press release, “that the decision to exclude the individuals was justified and that he wanted to ensure that an impartial and independent review of all the facts was undertaken.”
The complaint was made against rector and vice-chancellor Frederick Lowy, vice-rector services Michael Di Grappa and security guard Eric Abrams.
Marouf and Keefer said in their letter to Sally Spilhaus, an advisor at the
rights and responsibilities office that Lowy had denied their rights and their right to due process.
Di Grappa and Abrams were charged with harrassment, threatening and violent conduct and with interfering with the work that was going on at the CSU offices at the time of the incident, on July 20.
According to Marouf, Spillhaus rejected their complaint because they were not considered students.
“This proves that the officer of rights and responsibilities [Sally Spillhaus] is not doing her job and was biased in her decision. She is just repeating what the rector is telling her to say,” said Marouf.
On Aug. 31 Concordia University said that they were seeking an independent fact-finder in the exclusion case of the two students.
“This is not a response to the complaint, that the two banned students made to the office of rights and responsibilities,” said Dennis Murphy, the executive director of communications.
In a press release the university said that the fact-finder would be someone that is independent and impartial and that would review the facts that led to the exclusion decision. The fact-finder would be provided with all relevant material and invite submissions from the two excluded students.
“I think it is a total white-wash,” said Keefer. “This fact-finder proves that
rector Lowy does not know the facts. Not only that, it is highly irregular that someone would do something like this. We would only consider the fact-finder if he or she was truly independent and made a decision about the expulsion.”
Nonetheless, Lowy said in the press release, “that the decision to exclude the individuals was justified and that he wanted to ensure that an impartial and independent review of all the facts was undertaken.”
