The Martlet

This week’s election marks the end of a long-lived appeals process that, at times, embroiled the UVic Students’ Society (UVSS) in controversy.

At the UVSS Semi-Annual General Meeting (SAGM) on Feb. 11, students voted in favour of amending the current elections appeals process to create an arbitration panel that will act as the final judge on matters of rule-breaking in student elections, effectively removing that power from the UVSS Electoral Committee.

Currently, decisions on rule-breaking during elections are made by the Chief Electoral Officer. If their decision is appealed, it is taken to the electoral committee which is comprised of three board members. The committee is the final level of appeal.

Over the past decade, many students have charged the current appeals process as being unfair because of alleged partisanship on the committee.

“The essential problem with the electoral committee was that appeals were being dealt with by board members, which was inappropriate,” said UVSS Director-at-Large Kelsey Hannan, who sat on the ad-hoc committee that proposed the reforms last fall. “You couldn’t find worse people to hear appeals because they’re directly involved, and often they’re supporting people running in the election.”

Slates, friendships and cooperative relationships between colleagues are all causes for bias on the committee, said Hannan.

Such bias may sway the result of a student election, as it did in 2007 when Mike Waters was disqualified for allegedly accepting a third-party endorsement. The final decision to disqualify Waters was made by opponents running in the same election.

But Hannan believes the new process will prevent future unfairness.

In 2011 and beyond, there will be two tiers in the appeals process. The first appeal will be to an elections adjudicator, who cannot be a student.

The biggest change, however, will be in the final appeal. Any decision made by the adjudicator can be appealed to an arbitration panel, comprised of three individuals not running in the election. Two members of the panel cannot be board members, meaning the majority will have no personal stake in the election.

“Once this system is in place next year … people you ran with who are now sitting on the electoral committee can no longer decide on whether you are disqualified or not,” said UVSS Direcor-at-Large James Coccola, who was also on the ad-hoc committee. “It is something that, frankly, should have been done a long time ago.”

This change will benefit every student thinking about running in the election next year, said Coccola.

“One of the [concerns] when I was running last year … was that there were people on the electoral committee who were friends with people who were running,” he said. “This certainly will make it a lot easier for people who are running next year, knowing that when [they appeal a decision] it’s not going to go to a friend of the person who submitted the complaint against [them].”

Additionally, each member of the new arbitration panel must be nominated by the electoral committee and ratified by the UVSS Board of Directors by a two-thirds vote. Requiring a two-thirds vote will effectively screen any partisanship from the panel, said Hannan.

Who will sit on the panel, and how much the changes to electoral policy will cost, remains to be seen.

“There’s now a period where the policy around these committees needs to be structured, and one of those includes hiring,” said Hannan. “We haven’t actually decided the payment schemes.”

Elections cost the UVSS $18,000 to $20,000 each year. The cost should be in that range next year despite the new salaries, said Hannan, who expects paper balloting to be replaced by online voting, reducing the expenses associated with polling stations.