YFS election process under fire

Alexandra Birukova
and Brent Rose
News Department

York University’s report on the student union’s yearly elections process, released Sept. 16, critiques the system’s lack of transparency and fractured structural autonomy, which allegedly favours the incumbent party.

The report, conducted by York ombudsperson John McCamus, notes that the York Federation of Students (YFS) elections lacks “due process” in the appeals process, especially with the perceived conflict of interests inspired by the Chief Returning Officer (CRO) being on the same election committee responsible for reviewing the CRO’s decisions.

The YFS elections audit, which was conducted by third-party law firm Davis LLP and released Aug. 24, also recommended “the Elections Procedure Code should be reviewed in its entirety to ensure that it provides sufficient details to avoid or limit CRO discretionary decision-making relating to key elements in the Elections Process.”

The audit reports from both the YFS and York discuss the CRO selection process, and the administration’s report notes “the YFS Board that appoints the CRO is primarily comprised of the incumbent group, many of whom may seek re-election.” McCamus goes on to point out the process leads to what may be a conflict of interest.

York was led to draft their report following the dispute over last year’s CRO Casey Chu Cheong’s distribution of 10 demerit points to the New York slate for handing out copies of Excalibur. Director candidates were disqualified after accumulating 25 points, which put them over the allowance of 20 points by five.

After this ruling, complaints were made to the university about the appointment of Chu Cheong as CRO, alleging that she was selected without a clearly established hiring process.

Jeremy Salter, executive director of the YFS, told Excalibur on March 10, 2010 that the reason Chu Cheong was selected because she was “the most qualified candidate for the position.”

McCamus recommended the YFS instead create a “search committee” for the CRO. The YFS’s own audit recommended the union “publish the methodology and criteria by which the CRO is hired” to avoid future allegations about the conflict of interest.

McCamus also had concerns about the election committee as a whole. In the report he said the committee should “be reconstituted as an independent body dissociated from the current YFS directors and staff,” noting the YFS executive director, who sits as the chair on the elections committee, and other committee members also share a conflict of interest because of their association with the incumbent party.

“It appears as though there is a direct conflict of interest in having the [YFS] executive director serving as the chair of the electoral process that is responsible for selecting, in effect, his or her employer.” McCamus recommended that non-York Federation of Students members should hold a majority on the YFS Election Committee and that the university’s provost appoint a non-voting administration, faculty or student member to create a perception of independence and impartiality.

Salter said the YFS board of directors will review all of the recommendations proposed by both of the audits. He added that since the YFS is an autonomous organization, he finds it a “bit odd, to have outside individuals [university administration] making decisions regarding the election, but it is up to the will of the membership to make this call.”

Krisna Saravanamuttu, YFS president, told Excalibur on March 24, 2010 that York president Mamdouh Shoukri’s request for the York ombudsperson to complete the elections overview raised “some serious questions about student union autonomy.”

He also said that the administration should “never try to interfere with the autonomy of student unions.”

Rob Tiffin, York’s vice-president students, referenced Presidential Regulation 4 when explaining why president Shoukri commissioned York’s ombudsperson to audit the YFS elections process.

Regulation 4 states “the president of York University has a residual responsibility to ensure that York student elections are conducted in a democratic, orderly and responsible manner.”

Salter, however, said that he does not think the elections investigation is taking away from the student union’s autonomy because it is going to be up to the YFS board of directors to make any changes.

He added that the YFS is committed to making changes to its election code.

Among other recommendations put forward by the ombudsperson report was the suggestion to use metallic tape, as opposed to duct tape, when using the paper ballot process.

Both reports noted that non-York students should not be allowed to campaign, referring to the members of the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) that often advocated on behalf of the incumbent party.

Tiffin said that he is waiting to hear from the YFS about “how [the student union] plans to implement the recommendations they have received.”

“[York] is quite concerned about trying to ensure that student organizations have the ability to manage their affairs, but it goes back to […] trying to ensure there is orderly and democratic change,” Tiffin added.

Fraser Stevens, who ran for a presidential position on behalf of the New York slate against Saravanamuttu and lost in March 2010, told Excalibur in an email that he would like to believe “that the current YFS [team] will be honest enough to consider the recommendations and to enforce the changes that will aid in the running of […] fair elections.”

With files from the Excalibur archives