Words by Louise Jackson
It’s the election cycle that keeps on giving!
On 16 October, the Elections Tribunal ruled the provisional results of the SRC President election ‘void’. Georgia Thomas (Unite) was found to have breached Rule 39.4.16 of the Election Rules.
The complainant provided evidence of Thomas paying for the YouX membership of a prospective Unite candidate. Under the Tribunal’s ruling, this payment constituted a ‘gift’ to ‘exert undue influence’ to encourage the candidate to stand for election with Unite. The Tribunal has formally reprimanded her for breaching the Rule.
This comes after the disqualification of El Hall (Left Action) from the SRC Presidential election due to a complaint from Thomas. Thomas was declared SRC President in a recount.
As two out of the four candidates for the position have now faced Tribunal rulings, an election for SRC President has been called by the Tribunal for March 2024. The material effect of the rule breaches on the election results cannot be confidently assumed.
Thomas and Hall are not prohibited from standing in this election, and any additional candidates are permitted to nominate. Essentially, the election for 2024 SRC President is a clean slate.
The ‘alleged recipient’ of Thomas’ payment was not the complainant, and requested that the Tribunal not identify them. In providing a response to the Tribunal, the alleged recipient asked not to be involved in the investigation and did not provide evidence. The alleged recipient ‘submitted that the complainant had no standing to make the report’ and they did not want the Tribunal to investigate further.
The complaint was made by Cyrus Kelly (Transparency), the provisional runner-up for the recounted position of SRC President.
Kelly confirms he ‘did not have the consent of the person… to file the report’ and issues a ‘solemn apology’ to them. He still stands by his complaint as the ‘conduct affects everyone involved in the electoral process’.
Thomas labelled the complaint as ‘opportunistic and disingenuous’.
The Tribunal ruled the complaint was valid, as Kelly’s own election results may have been impacted by an earlier complaint.
He states he was ‘genuinely concerned’ by Thomas’ conduct and characterises the Rule breach as ‘a far greater breach of the electoral process than [Hall’s]’.
Responding to the Tribunal, Thomas confirmed that she had paid for the alleged recipient’s YouX membership so they would be eligible to nominate for candidacy.
Thomas claimed the payment only occurred after the alleged recipient had begun the nomination process, and did not influence their decision to stand as a candidate. She provided screenshots of her conversation with the alleged recipient as further evidence.
The Tribunal found the messages in some cases undermined Thomas’ claims. The messages (not provided in the ruling due to the alleged recipients request for anonymity) show Thomas thanking the alleged recipient for nominating. The alleged recipient found they could not nominate as they did not hold a YouX membership.
The requirement for a paid YouX membership to stand as a candidate in student elections was rejected by all faction representatives at the 2023 StuPol Debate.
Thomas offered to pay the alleged recipient’s fee, noting she believes the fee to be an economic barrier for candidacy. The alleged recipient expressed doubts about nominating. The Tribunal characterised Thomas as ‘continu[ing] to press the Alleged Recipient to accept the payment’. The payment was eventually accepted, and nomination completed.
The ruling takes into account the alleged recipient’s reluctance or neutrality toward nomination.
The Tribunal ruled Thomas paid the alleged recipient’s fee because their candidacy was ultimately to the benefit of Thomas, rather than because she believed that the alleged recipient would be a good representative of the student body.
While they did not go so far as conclusively ruling a bribe had occurred, the Rule does cover ‘gifts’ and the ‘exert[ion] of undue influence’, which Thomas was reprimanded for.
Thomas calls for further ‘questioning into the cost of YouX membership as a requirement to stand for election’.
What happens next?
The interim Presidential vacancy is in the hands of the SRC. Rule 9b of the SRC Constitution, and the SRC Casual Vacancy Policy will form the basis of their decisions.
Our understanding is the position will be advertised as a casual vacancy, and a candidate then selected by the Council based on application.
An elected SRC President will be decided by students from 25 March 2024 (Week 5).
On Dit 