After a 45-minute judicial hearing on Monday to determine whether or not the Students for Change slate will be disqualified the board decided to deliberate and come to a conclusion today.
The hearing comes as the slates’ Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates won the elections.
The complaint was filed against the A.S. Elections Committee by Audrey Younna, the campaign manager of the A-Team slate in the recent elections. It accused the committee of not following their own codes by failing to disqualify the entire Students for Change campaign when a violation occurred.
It all began when the Students for Change campaign violated election rules by passing out campaign stickers. The elections committee moved to punish the slate by prohibiting them from passing out fliers between 10:45 a.m. and 12:45 p.m.’
Member of the Students for Change slate, Jackie Guzman, was caught distributing fliers during the prohibited hours. Going against the punishment that was given to the campaign.
As a result Guzman was disqualified from the elections, but her fellow slate members weren’t. Younna argued that all the members on the slate should be disqualified based on codes the elections committee created.
After not being able to effectively communicate her argument to the A.S. Election’s committee, Younna said she decided to seek help from the school’s judicial court.
‘I didn’t feel like my complaint was being heard so I went to judicial,’ said Younna.
The hearing was comprised of the members of the judicial board, Audrey Younna and Director of Elections Mazen Hafez.
Both sides were given the opportunity to speak, bring forth witnesses, argue against the opposition and provide a closing statement. In order to be fair each side was given the same amount of time to speak and time was kept by a member of the judicial board.
The code reads ‘an individual and or slate’ is subject to punishment, said Hafez.
‘Guzman made it clear that she acted alone and was not told by members of her campaign to violate the code, said Hafez. We did everything in accordance to codes and evidence given,’ Hafez said.’
The section of the code referring to ‘an individual and or the slate’ is pertaining to the idea that some candidates run independently and therefore don’t belong to a slate, said Jessica Simon, student advocate.
The code was stated that way to incorporate the candidates that run as an independent, said Simon.
‘She told a good story but we are here for the facts,’ said elections advisor Augie Guribay.’
The codes are not there to be interpreted. The codes are written and are to be followed as they are stated, said Guribay.