In effect, four people were declared victors and had that taken from them, but only two don’t get the satisfaction of actually holding office for the next year. My condolences to Sarah and Richard.

I was originally somewhat concerned about some of the precedents set in this decision, but since this JB disregarded a number of precedents set by previous J.B.s, I think the only reasonable conclusion is that there is no such thing as precedent when it comes to the Judicial Board.

If there really is or should be concern about these executives, a petition signed by about 1,400 people should be sufficient to recall either of them. Again, due process etc.

@NC, in fairness all of the executive candidates were white, but I too was surprised to see that the student body didn’t elect a single one of the women who were on the ballot. That is unprecedented in my experience.

I as usual agree with John Doucette on all counts.

Not all hippies supported Jamie and Aaron and some of us thought their DQs were justified. I am both surprised and disappointed that they were overturned and am concerned about what next year’s DSU will look like.

And since I have defined myself as a hippie already, I would like to say how disappointed I am that next year’s executive is entirely made up of white males. Diversity!

1): Mr. Price mislead the judicial board (presumably he was aware of the secretary at these meetings)
2): The judicial board’s findings are based on potentially incorrect evidence (if the meeting minutes disagree with the testimony).

No idea what the impact of that would be. Also worth noting: As usual, none of the meeting minutes in question are to be seen on the DSU’s new $30,000 website that was supposed to fix that problem. Dare I say “I told you so…”

I began chairing the Executive meetings at this time and there are agendas and minutes for each meeting on record.

It would be helpful if people who chose to speak on the Executive behalf represented us truthfully.

The Judicial Board’s task in determining the DSU’s policy regarding artistic works
created in conjunction with students is rendered incredibly difficult due to the DSU Executive’s
questionable practice of not keeping written minutes of meetings. Mr. Price informed the
Judicial Board that, up to February 2012, the DSU Executive did not keep written minutes of its
meetings. This practice unfortunately displays a lack of transparency that renders holding the
DSU Executive accountable for its decisions incredibly difficult, leaving the entirety of the
matter to the word and good faith of those who were present at the meeting.

So for all of you hipsters/hippies/whatever that were yammering about the disqualifications being an affront of democracy? Well your candidates did exactly that; and embodied the exact behaviours that I’m sure you also hold against the Conservatives and Republicans — corruption, disregard for the rules, disrepect, and self-indulgence. I, for one, am glad that I’m graduating because I think it’s a disgrace to have such corrupt elected officials who had no regard/respect for the other candidates in their races, nor for the students who they are supposed to be now representing. Way to sign up for a year of deceit, rule dodging, and ignorance. I wish you all the best. (you’re going to need it)

And for those of you who feel the same as me and will still be here next year — don’t let them get away with it — you don’t have to be represented that way if you don’t want to. Be a Councillor, a Board of Operations member, a committee member; put pressure, demand results, and ask questions. Just because the candidates you voted for didn’t win, doesn’t mean that you don’t deserve better. They owe you just as much as the people who supported them and don’t let them forget that. The DSU belongs to the students; the DSU is the students — take ownership.

Henry :

Not often a board that levies fines is going to overturn them…

Actually, the provision requiring that appeals be first made to the E.C. was in response to the last time an appeal was made to the J.B., where the E.C. explicitly said they would have overturned their own decision in light of new information, if there was any procedure for doing so. They also implied that if they had the ability to revisit one of the other charges, they might have reduced the fees. The Constitution was modified to give the E.C. a chance to re-examine the information, a faster and less formal process to revisit their decisions in light of any new information.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/front/68730-robocall-claim-smear-campaign-harper-asserts

Not often a board that levies fines is going to overturn them, IF this is true then the JB is going to have some fun on their hands.

Yes.

Residence Council’s DO NOT have the right to bring whoever they want into their buildings, it comes down to Residence Life and the RLM of each building. I WOULD however hazard a guess, knowing the council at Risley, that they would have talked to their RLM and that she would be very aware of this going on at the Residence prior.