University pours cold water on fiery antics with tough code of conduct

Students burning couches or breaking glass will soon risk the wrath of the University of Otago, which yesterday adopted a tough new code of conduct.

After intense debate, the university council set aside doubts about whether the code was legal to include it in its disciplinary regulations from next year.

However, those legal doubts mean it may yet be dropped.

Student president Paul Chong said later that the Otago University Students Association would launch a court challenge.

"We will see the university in court," he said.

During the meeting, Mr Chong said the association's advice was the code breached both the Education Act and the Bill of Rights.

Vice-chancellor Professor David Skegg said escalating anti-social student behaviour was the most serious immediate problem the university faced.

"If we don't adopt the code, I think it is inevitable that the police will be forced to adopt methods of policing that have not been common in this city," he said.

There had been 234 fires in North Dunedin in the 11 months to the end of August.

"I don't need to remind members of council that that is not only a flagrant waste of public money but also potentially risks disaster," Professor Skegg said.

"If there was a fire at the hospital and the Fire Service was tied up with these totally unnecessary fires, it's going to be a matter of great regret."

There was also the danger of students being seriously burned.

"I want to make it very clear that sneering and jeering and throwing bottles at firefighters is not part of the Otago University tradition," he said.

However, that was the reputation the university was gaining.

"As a member of staff and a graduate of this university, that makes me angry."

The unruly behaviour was overshadowing the university's achievements, and the students' association had failed to show leadership on the issue, he said.

The code extends the reach of the university's discipline regulations beyond the campus for the first time, and prohibits actions that "are unreasonably disruptive" or "result in damage to property" or "are otherwise unlawful". Those who breach it face a range of sanctions, including expulsion.

Professor Skegg confirmed the university's lawyers had discussed some amendments to the code with the students' association's legal counsel, including constitutional law expert Mai Chen, but had decided not to make changes in case it looked like it was backing down. That was the worst message the university could send, he said.

Mr Chong said he was shocked the code had not been amended after those legal discussions appeared to have resulted in agreement that changes were necessary.

He tabled a paper that included a rewritten preamble to the code, which he said was drawn up in consultation with university lawyer Diccon Sim.

However, Mr Sim said he believed that the code was lawful and would not be successfully challenged in the High Court.

After the meeting Professor Skegg said the university's legal advisers and those for the students' association agreed the university's authority was defined not by the campus boundary, but by the link between any misbehaviour and the university as an institution.

"The university has always been clear that it does not seek to control behaviour unconnected with the university, and the code does not have that effect."

- OTAGO DAILY TIMES