University silence on PIKE is negligent

Since the start of this school year, the Pi Kappa Alpha (PIKE) fraternity has been under a suspension imposed by the University. Several weeks ago, the Hopkins chapter of PIKE forfeited its charter, ceasing its official presence on campus. While under suspension, PIKE’s members were forbidden from functioning in any manner as the organization known as PIKE. They could not hold rush events or a pledge class, they could not create a new “PIKE house,” and they could not hold parties, mixers or any other event besides those associated with a pre-approved improvement plan that would condition their return to campus next school year. With their charter now surrendered, though, the fraternity is no longer recognized by the University or the general PIKE fraternity.

The terms of the suspension were made clear last May by University administrators, who principally include Vice Provost for Student Affairs Kevin G. Shollenberger and Dean of Student Life Terry Martinez. However, as reported in this edition’s article “PIKE forfeits charter, operates underground,” PIKE has not abided by the University’s rules. They have held parties under the PIKE name, held rush events and inducted pledges — essentially operating underground.

These underground activities, which we expect will continue despite the absence of a charter, are dangerous and should be acted upon by the University administration. For a fraternity with the past list of transgressions that this one holds, to operate in the way that this group has with essentially no fear of serious repercussions produces a very unhealthy environment and dangerous precedent at this school.

These activities have occurred for months against the terms of the suspension, and the University has not done anything to stop them. It is common knowledge among students that PIKE parties are happening and that they have been happening for awhile, whether advertised widely or not. The fraternity has been blatantly breaking the terms of its suspension, but there have been no repercussions. Why has the suspension not been enforced?

The University’s inaction can only be described by one of two scenarios. Either it is not aware of PIKE’s transgressions, or it has consciously chosen not to employ disciplinary action. We find the latter case both unacceptable and unlikely. As for the former, an entity that assumes so much oversight as this one has a responsibility to know what is happening within its jurisdiction. We understand the likelihood that Vice Provost Shollenberger, Dean Martinez and those they work with knew of PIKE’s activities yet were unable to act because of the lack of proof. As the article in this paper shows, it was definitely difficult to prove the actions of PIKE on the record — the number of sources who only agreed to speak on condition of anonymity is telling. And it is surely less likely that students would talk to administrators about the issue than with a student reporter.

However, this is not an excuse. If the University imposes sanctions on a fraternity (or any group), with real, threatened consequences, they should ensure that they are capable of enforcing them. If the University doesn’t have the ability to determine whether PIKE is having parties and holding rush events, then what is the purpose of prohibiting them from doing so? The suspension becomes nothing more than an inconvenience to the fraternity.

If this type of omniscience is impossible, then the University is not at liberty to promise disciplinary action it is not capable of following through with. Rules need to be enforced, and this entire situation just makes the University seem impotent.

The Editorial Board believes the first step in a solution should naturally be some sort of University action. We can only expose truths — it is the University’s responsibility to act as an authority, whether that be through an investigation or by some other means. This fraternity is in a position in which is it no longer subject to rules by the Interfraternity Council or the University. Given all the work the University and other groups have put into improving the safety of Greek Life, allowing this fraternity to operate with absolutely no oversight is dangerous and irresponsible. It is for this reason that the Editorial Board believes the University should take action immediately.

Editor’s Note: Editor-in-Chief Jack Bartholet, who wrote the news article on PIKE for for this edition, was not involved in the writing or discussion of this editorial.