Who Represents What?   For a body of 5500 students, the issue of representation is complicated. Last week's student demonstration, unsigned circulars, and the reaction to Outlook's criticism all cast a shade on the issue of student representation. Last week students demonstrated against the date of the deadline for payment of tuition fees. The date falls on January 27 and students demanded that it be delayed at least until their parents received their February paycheck. But it wasn't any of the student representative committees who actually stirred up the whole action. If it weren't for the Commoners, who performed a commendable job, no student protests would have occurred. The demonstration also witnessed a smart step on the part of the administration that met the students halfway, listened to their complaints, and expressed willingness to help students out in their problem. Vice President for Financial Affairs John Bernson and Dean of Student Affairs Dean Kevlin held the megaphone and addressed the students. Perhaps it was the administration's "we care" sign. Students owe their representatives nothing for the fruitful demonstration. They owe the Commoners instead. Even at the site of the demonstration, University Student Faculty Committee members were not up to the event. They were shy, most of their arguments were poor, and they could not assume leadership. The demonstration, which was against the payment deadline, was turned into the day for all student complaints. Starting with financial issues, student complaints extended to cover the problem of grade deflation, safety issues, and student affairs, in addition to committees' request for "representatives' immunity." The demonstration was against a certain issue. When Bernson responded that in principle there was no problem in delaying the deadline, USFC students should have thanked him, promised students to follow up on the issue, and called the assembly off. What happened, instead, was that the demonstration was turned into a debate where students started expressing their concerns. Open forum discussions are always welcome, yet it is the USFC's duty (not that of the students) to reflect such concerns in its meetings with the administration. It seems weird that every time students want to make themselves heard, they have to sponsor a demonstration themselves instead of going through the USFC. Had it not been for the Commoners' megaphone, we might never have learned about these demonstrating students' opinions. Due to improper representation, student frustration has been also sensed through the distribution of a couple of unsigned circulars. One of the circulars was stamped with a no-features face carrying the mathematical sign for "There exists." The other circular was stamped with a question mark. Not only did the circulars denounce some student actions, they also reflected the intention of some students to express their views from behind a veil. Were these students properly represented and were their opinions properly heard, they would have certainly unveiled their identity and participated in debates about student issues. A third indicator of inadequate representation is the pressure Outlook has to bear every time it reports on some University problem. Though not slanderous or defaming, Outlook's articles have been the cause of some University units' discontent. Jafet Library, the Workers' Syndicate, and a couple of West Hall staff have all objected to Outlook's reports. We shall rest our case before our readers. Outlook was preparing a feature article about the pros and cons of Jafet Library. The article discussed thoroughly the main library's important role throughout the University's history. One small editor's note was however added to the article. The note stated that it is by no means acceptable that Jafet Library close for eight consecutive days, thus putting research on hold for one whole week. University Librarian Helene Bekhazi blamed Outlook for not researching its material. She explained that American and European university libraries close for the week of Christmas. She also said that the president had issued a memo announcing the one-week holiday. She concluded that Outlook's suggestion for a library staff back-up team to keep the library open more often was not feasible. Outlook replied that each university around the world has its own peculiar calendar and that students have the right to object and to express their dissatisfaction with any of the president's decisions. Furthermore, Jafet can form its back-up team to keep the library open longer hours only if it pays some overtime wages to its employees. Jafet doesn't mean exclusively a study room; it means also a vital tool for academic research and should be accessible as frequently as possible. On a similar notice, Outlook's columnist Kamal Sanjakdar wrote an opinion piece in which he observed that the picture of Rida Kabreet, Head of the Syndicate, was on every page of the syndicate's publication al-Nashra. The Syndicate officers were enraged. They thought that it was upon the instigation of the administration that Outlook was starting a crusade against them. The author of these lines tried to calm down the syndicate's officers by explaining that the article represents Sanjakdar's opinion only and that Outlook is preparing a feature article about their organization and its situation. Now we still wonder why the syndicate's officers were enraged because of one student's opinion. Isn't there any room for accepting each other's opinion in this university? As a matter of fact, many students think that as long as there has been no elections in the syndicate since 1993 - no matter who or what was behind the delay in elections - the seven-year-old syndicate doesn't actually reflect the opinion of the workers. We would want to come back to this issue at the right time but now, since we're talking about freedom of expression, different members of the AUB community must learn how to tolerate each other's opinion. The issue of West Hall staff will be discussed later, if need be, in order to illustrate the situation of AUB workers. Workers, faculty, and most importantly student views - for different reasons -- are not being reflected properly. For this reason, parties are left to carry out a student representation job, some students are circulating mysterious circulars, and Outlook is provoking unwanted reaction rather than initiating debate on its pages. The whole representation issue must be treated at AUB. Some must learn how to carry out their representative duties, others must learn how to tolerate opinion other than theirs. With notions such as freedom of expression, representation, and democracy, the AUB community still has a long way to go.