A hearing to determine whether ISU bondage and sadomasochism group Cuffs is guilty of assault is scheduled for Monday — but behind closed doors.

The university’s Office for Judicial Affairs filed charges against Cuffs after a two-month investigation into whether the group violated student disciplinary regulations at a Nov. 10 meeting.

Despite the possible advantages an open hearing could provide Cuffs, the group’s president, Harlan “Duane” Long Jr., decided to close the hearing to protect the identity of witnesses.

“When I was made aware of the inability to protect members’ privacy, I had little choice but to require the hearing be closed,” Long said. “I’ve had people say if it’s open, they won’t testify.”

Long said he was in favor of an open hearing until he found out it would be difficult to protect witnesses’ identities.

Mark Goodman, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, said it could be hard for Long to argue Cuffs has been discriminated against if the university finds the group guilty, because there will be no public access to the hearing.

“Openness benefits everybody. It ensures those who are accused are treated fairly and those who are affected by the allegations are fully informed,” Goodman said.

“If I were a member of this university group, I would be apprehensive about a secret hearing.”

If, after a guilty verdict, Cuffs members think the hearing was conducted unfairly, the group can appeal the case to the Dean of Students for review. Yet, Goodman said, there is less of a chance for success because the hearing is closed.

“Momentum is against them,” he said. “They’ve been found guilty, the proceeding has completed. And especially on a university campus, officials are reluctant to overturn those beneath them.”

However, Bethany Schuttinga, director of Judicial Affairs, said the decision was left up to Long. She said the university has the responsibility under law to honor Cuffs’ request.

“My obligation in the judicial process is to protect the privacy of those involved,” she said.

Schuttinga, who led the investigation, will also be administering the hearing.

“You have the same person playing accuser, judge and jury. We don’t allow that in our court system for a very good reason,” Goodman said. “One can conduct this without bias, but when political pressure is brought to bear there is that greater risk of manipulation that goes along with secrecy.”

However, Schuttinga said this is not the case.

“It’s my duty and responsibility to be unbiased. It’s my job to listen to the information and to evaluate that information accordingly,” she said.

Barbara Mack, associate professor of journalism and communication and a practicing First Amendment lawyer, said the closed hearing will be a disservice to the public.

“In this case, I believe it is important to have a clear public discussion of an issue of great public importance,” Mack said. “This is not a case of one student misbehaving, this is a case about how an organization is conducting itself. Students need to know what conduct is appropriate and what is not.”

Long said he will be making a statement after the hearing and will answer questions; however, it is unclear whether the university will release any information.

“At this point, it’s a premature question to ask, because we’re in the middle of the hearing process,” Schuttinga said.