It could let the student parties cross-examine each other, which would be cheaper but could subject students to "further harm or harassment." Or it could let their "agents" handle cross-examination, most likely lawyers, and either pay for representation itself or let students hire their own lawyers.
The university chose the cheaper option.
UMich is facing blowback from both pro-accuser and due-process advocates for implementing an interim policy that is considered even worse than the process struck down by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Comment: The author has a point - even if she sometimes uses bad examples (like the use of cancer-causing pesticides) to make it. Without objective data and a perspective that isn't motivated by the feel-good emotions of "doing good", or a power and profit motive that lies behind many of those advocating for sweeping economic and environmental policies, people are quite likely to make quality of life worse for many.