Overturn of election results violates democracy
By John Du and Dan Ryu
One by one the winners were announced. Two large groups gathered
on the steps of Kerckhoff Hall to hear the results. One group
stood, heads bowed and arms clinging to each other in a tight
circle. They remained silent throughout the ordeal.
From amidst the other group came the shouts of victory. Eleven
times they cheered. But on the 12th name, they fell
uncharacteristically silent.
The tight circle now erupted with joy. Their heads no longer
bowed, they cheered the sole victory of their candidate. York Chang
had won.
That was the scenario one year ago last week, when undergraduate
student government election results were announced. The progressive
slate, comprised of candidates from different student
organizations, were all but completely swept by a slate of
candidates comprised of mostly greek members. As undergraduate
President Rob Greenhalgh and company took office, members of the
different student organization could only stand by and watch,
hoping the newly elected undergraduate student government members
would prove more effective in working on relevant student issues
than in years past. Only time would tell.
Unfortunately, the answer turned out to be a resounding NO!
After a year of ineffective leadership, various student
organizations once again gathered together in hopes of getting more
active student government leaders elected ("active," as in they
would actually do something). After a year of proving himself in
the external vice president’s office, Chang was asked to be the
student coalition’s presidential candidate.
On May 4, 1995 at approximately midnight, once again, two crowds
gathered to hear the results of the elections. Only this time, the
cheers erupted from a different crowd. For the first time in two
years, the candidates supported by the student groups won the
majority of student government offices. Of the 10 offices
contested, the Students First! slate had captured more votes for
nine of them. And while three of the offices were still to be
determined in a runoff, optimism ran high for the five captured
offices. Nothing could stop the gathering momentum.
Nothing, that is, except for four justices appointed by current
President Rob Greenhalgh to comprise the judicial board, or
"J-Board," the final overseeing body of the undergraduate student
council. On May 3, current General Representative Marwa Kilani and
campaign manager Matthew Weathers filed a complaint because of a
Bruin Democrats advertisement supporting the Students First! team.
While the ad had previously been approved by the Election Board,
which oversees elections, J-Board apparently balked because the ad
included the word "endorses," because the election board does not
officially recognize the Bruin Democrats as an official endorsing
group.
The fact that the Election Board Chair had approved the ad did
not seem relevant to any of the J-Board members, who apparently
felt it was in their jurisdiction to infringe on the Bruin
Democrats’ right to free speech by forbidding the use of the word
"endorse" in an advertisement paid for from individuals’
pockets.
And what penalty did the board pass for the use of one word in
an ad, for the Bruin Democrats’ free expression of their support?
Simple. As a penalty, they selectively and arbitrarily overturned
the election results of Students First! candidates and called for a
new election.
Four students appointed to the J-Board, saw fit to negate the
voice of almost 5,000 voting students. Four students, with
obviously no knowledge of the constitutional First Amendment or the
UCLA election code and a complete disregard for any semblance of
impartiality, decided that candidates who had rightfully won their
positions (Reyes Valenzuela, Steph Nakano and Miho Murai from the
Students First! slate and Cheryl Chang), would now have to run
again. In addition, Joe Levin, an independent general
representative candidate, was removed from the ballot.
Basically, the J-Board ruled null and void the election of
Students First! candidates as general representatives and Student
Welfare commissioner. And in so doing, it violated simple
democratic principles, ignorantly dismissing the ballot box and
overruling the expression of the popular will.
Apparently, the J-Board felt that the First Amendment did not
apply to student government, that their so-called judicial process
could be used as a tool to further their political and personal
agendas. And the most horrifying and ridiculous thing: they didn’t
even have the legal knowledge or experience to make the decision
look legitimate or substantive.
For the most part, although grumblings about corruption and
election fixing have been tossed around, the Students First! slate
hopes the J-Board decision was based on mere incompetence and that
it will soon be resolved. But this past Sunday night, the board’s
"incompetence" became too overwhelming to be left at that. That
night, J-Board met again to make another decision and did not
notify any of the candidates involved, as is required of any public
decision-making body, according to the Brown Act of California.
That night, they decided that a single candidate, Cheryl Chang (a
"greek slate" member who won a general representative position)
would be spared from having to run again.
Only the results for three winning candidates from the Students
First! slate were overturned. The rationale and decision by the
J-Board would be held as null, void and laughable in any real court
of law.
Does this sound patently ridiculous to anyone else? Does this
sound like certain individuals are trying to overturn the results
of a fair election because they didn’t like the results? Is anyone
else outraged at the seeming ease with which J-Board can
arbitrarily pick and choose which candidates must run again? Are
certain individuals so desperate to have an office in Kerckhoff
Hall?
While J-Board members might think fiddling with student
government elections is child’s play, they fail to recognize the
magnitude of their decision. The California Supreme Court case
Gooch v. Hendrick spells out the guidelines for overturning an
election. First and foremost, in accordance with Section 20024 of
the County election code, the case reaffirms that "it is the
primary principle of law as applied to election contests that it is
the duty of the court to validate the election if possible. That is
to say, the election must be held valid unless plainly
illegal."
In other cases, the court has decided "the contestant has the
burden of proving the defect in the election by clear and
convincing evidence" and that the evidence must be considered in
the "light most favorable to the prevailing party."
In short plain English, we cannot arbitrarily overturn election
because of one word! And because this case has a California Supreme
Court precedent, yes, it does apply to the UCLA campus, despite
certain justices’ insistence that we live in a bubble-world where
real laws don’t affect us. The J-Board nullification of the
election results eerily resembles the type of guidelines used by
despots and authoritarians to run their "democratic" elections.
Perhaps next time we could save everyone a lot of trouble by
printing ballots with only the candidates’ names submitted by the
J-Board.
Although some have characterized these elections as "greeks
against nongreeks," that distinction no longer seems relevant.
"What your letters are" no longer seems relevant when individuals
try to prevent the free expression of the people. Now, these
elections are all about justice and accountability. Will J-Board be
held accountable? Will justice prevail and the democratically-
elected candidates be placed in office? The current undergraduate
council must now weigh that decision.
With a three-fourths vote, or 10 out of 13 council members, the
undergraduate council can overrule what we perceive to be the
incompetence of J-Board. Most of the current undergraduate council
members, however, currently affiliate themselves with the losing
candidates. How will they vote in this case? We’ll find out
tonight. Come to the USAC meeting where it will all be decided.
Du is external vice president-elect and Ryu is the Students
First! team campaign manager. This viewpoint was co-signed by
members and supporters of the Students First! team.