The NIU Judicial Board’s action concerning the 11 students charged with racial activity is bound to spur mixed reactions both on and off campus. Less than a week after the action was made public, administrators and students already have begun to form opinions about the severity of the sanctions.

Two students were found guilty of harrassing a minority student in the residence hall where they lived. The board transferred the two from their hall and ordered them to pay a $50 fine or accept a 10-hour work assignment. In addition, they were placed on university disciplinary probation for the remainder of their enrollments at NIU.

Other students involved in racially discriminatory incidents received deferred suspensions. They will be immediately suspended from the university upon being found guilty of further violations of the judicial code. These students were charged with disruptive behavior, not racial discrimination.

Some have said the punishments were equitable, while others felt the students should have been handed tougher sanctions.

owever, the board’s action should not be second guessed by an uninformed public. The entire racism issue is complex and is clouded by a number of unanswered questions, thus making it near impossible and uncredible for outsiders to make passing judgements on the board’s decisions.

Concerning the residence hall incident, it is quite questionable for someone to form an opinion about the severity of the punishments without having any knowledge about the incident at hand. Only the Judicial Board has gained this knowledge through private testimony it has heard. And only the students involved in the incident know what actually was said or done, to whom, and in what context.

Other questions remain about the definition of the word “harrassment.” The judicial board has met to address the issue, which also is slated for discussion by the University Council. But as of now, the word itself and violations attached to it are not clearly defined in the judicial code.

It is difficult to punish offenders of a violation which itself is being questioned by the university. The uncertainty of the issue makes it even more difficult for outsiders to judge those punishments.

It is no doubt unethical for anybody to abuse their right to free speech by making racial slurs and offensive remarks. But until the community and the university is clear about issues surrounding the “harrassment” issue, it is relatively unethical to second guess the actions of the Judicial Board.