Decision upholds student’s ouster from U of R election
Maria Aman continues work with lawyer on battle over her disqualification
A candidate who was disqualified from the University of Regina Students’ Union election is continuing to fight after losing her appeal last week.
The elections committee recommended disqualifying Maria Aman, who ran for vice-president student affairs during the mid-March URSU election, after she questioned the chief returning officer (CRO) and university registrar’s office about poll closure times.
That same committee heard her appeal on April 7.
“It’s not typical. An appeal is the right to ask a neutral body to substitute their own view for that of someone else,” said Larry Kowalchuk, Aman’s lawyer.
“It is questionable whether or not the concept of fairness, which in law is called natural justice, is satisfied when, essentially, people who are hearing an appeal are the ones who are basically hearing themselves (and) have to reconsider their decision.”
Following the committee’s recommendation, the board of directors disqualified Aman on March 20, and upheld that decision on April 11 after reviewing the appeal hearing report.
The committee gave the board a second option: to defer the appeal to a new independent committee or a replacement CRO if it found “apprehension of bias or breach of natural justice,” or found “sufficient grounds upon which to overturn the decision.”
“We did all the work that we were supposed to do for this meeting,” said Aman, to help the board make “an informed decision, a responsible decision, (that) the outcome should be overturned.”
“This is not only my responsibility as a board director to advocate for students’ voices, but this is also a personal responsibility to uphold democracy,” added Aman, who represents part-time students on the board.
Kowalchuk said he and Aman are exploring their options. URSU’s election and referendum bylaw allows for a single appeal, unless “new information that the chief returning officer (or, in this case, elections committee) deems to be significant is brought forward.”
The committee is made up of URSU executive members Matthew Mutschler and Abby Rutko, and URSU general manager Carl Flis.
“As per the constitution and bylaws, the elections committee objectively heard the appeal and provided a recommendation to the board of directors. The bylaws and constitution outline this procedure,” Rutko said in an email.
It is “troubling” to Kowalchuk that a university student body would punish a student for “questioning authority in the interests of democracy.”
“The appeal process doesn’t allow for someone to sit down and go, ‘Look, what’s at stake here?’ and have a neutral look at it,” said Kowalchuk. The students’ union “has an obligation to promote certain principles on behalf of the interest of all students.”
On three counts pertaining to the URSU bylaws, and one pertaining to the constitution, the committee found Aman disrespected the decision and office of the CRO, as she did not “abide by the decision of the CRO.” The CRO had recused herself prior to Aman’s initial behavioural misconduct hearing, as Aman had accused the CRO of bias.
The committee also found Aman disrespected the general manager, “attempted to interfere with the election process by trying to … change polling times,” and “directly and inappropriately contacted independent third-party election officials (registrar).”
To the latter two points, at least two people support Aman’s version of events.
Student Bo Batbaatar said in a statement that “concerns about the neutrality of the CRO (were) expressed by numerous candidates.”
Registrar’s office employee Sultan Ahmed did not feel harassed, and told Aman it was her “right to know and ask questions,” according to a statement he signed.
The elections committee admitted in its report that “there was confusion surrounding poll closing times.”
Voting in the three-day election closed at 11:59 p.m. on March 16. A mass email sent by U of R Student Services and approved by URSU on March 14 said voting closed at 5 p.m. URSU also posted that time to its website and social media, along with the fact that physical polling stations closed at 4 p.m.
“Clarifications regarding the 11:59 deadline were sent out on March 16,” the committee wrote. “It is suspected that this may have confused some as to the actual voting period deadline.”
The committee found it “highly inappropriate” that Aman would approach the registrar. Candidates were to approach only the CRO with questions relating to the election.
But, Aman said, candidates weren’t told that registrar’s office employees were considered elections officials.
“I was acting in good faith in an attempt to learn more about issues raised by URSU and (Ahmed) can attest to this,” Aman argued.
The committee had previously accused Aman of breaching the Respectful University Policy and of failing to represent URSU well as a current director of the board.
Both of those allegations were repealed, as “infractions pertaining to any other URSU governance documents if warranted should be addressed by the board of directors.”