On Feb. 19, Jamie Arron and Aaron Beale brought their case to the Judicial Board to determine their status on the Dalhousie Student Union (DSU) for next year.
The Judicial Board has yet to make their decision public, but will have their answers written and presented to the candidates involved, the chair of the Dalhousie Student Union (DSU) and union president Chris Saulnier within one month of the hearing.
The Board is made of Dal law students, and their decision is final.
The two candidates are appealing the decision made earlier this semester by the DSU elections committee to disqualify them as president and vice-president (academic and external), respectively.
Arron won the presidency with a 58.3 per cent majority but amassed $120 in fines, for post-campaign Facebook posts and alleged use of DSU footage in a campaign video, among other claims. The position passed to Sarah Bouchard, pending the result of the appeals.
Each fine accrued was valued at $20, so only one charge needed to be dropped in order for Arron to be declared the winner.
Beale won VP (academic and external) with a 61.2 per cent majority, the largest majority a candidate earned when competing for a position, but was disqualified for an amassed total of $205 in fines. Richard Clark, the runner-up, was therefore declared the winner pending the appeal results.
The majority of Beale’s fines were $5 for each handbill handed out after campaigning was officially closed Monday night, contributing to $145 of his total.
The DSU elections committee took three days to consider both candidates’ appeals but rejected them both.
Arron has since set up a webpage, titled Jamie’s Appeals, which says the following:
“These fines were issued by the Elections Committee (EC) and Chief Returning Officer (CRO) without having access to all information and without first corresponding with me to gather necessary details. I do not blame the EC or CRO for this as they were bound to a flawed process instructed by the DSU Constitution. Although only one fine needs to be repealed in order for me to be reinstated as President-Elect, I’m confident that the EC will see it fit to reverse all/most fines based on the evidence provided in my appeals.”
Beale had found the student who had caused the majority of his post-campaigning fines but even with that knowledge, the election committee denied the appeal, stating:
“The candidate was aware of the risks of distributing campaign materials, and of the penalties for post-campaigning. However, he failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate the potential that his materials would be misused.”
That student, Matthew Glynn, spoke in Beale’s favour at the Judicial Board hearing. Students were free to file a request to speak for or against either of the candidates.
Recent Comments