IEC Rulings
The following are unofficial copies of Independent Electoral Commission rulings, reproduced here for the public record.
Ali Godson - March 19, 2010
Notice of IEC Ruling on Allegation of Major Offense
Ali,
The Independent Electoral Commission has concluded investigation into allegations of your infraction against the electoral policy by failing to remove campaign material during voting period. You were invited to respond to the allegations at a meeting which took place on March 17th. Following deliberation, we have rendered the ruling as follows.
You testified that you were sick on the day of poll opening, and were unable to attend to emails until late afternoon when you simultaneously received an email reminder and a notice of allegation. You promptly removed the questionable material at this time. You also clarified the original intent of the status message and that you were unable to remove third party comments on time due to illness. We accept this testimony. In light of these extenuating circumstances, as well as the fact that this is limited to a single status message, we find that you have not committed a major offense.
Due to this finding, we consider other arguments raised during the meeting moot, and as such will not be discussed here.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you wish to appeal this ruling, you must submit the appeal to the Independent Electoral Commission within two business days of receiving this notice, in accordance with Electoral Policy section J4(c)(iv).
Sincerely,
Marc Fontaine
Kyle Acierno - March 19, 2010
Notice of IEC Ruling on Allegation of Major Offense
Kyle,
The Independent Electoral Commission has concluded investigation into allegations of your infraction against the electoral policy by failing to remove campaign material during voting period. You were invited to respond to the allegations at a meeting which took place on March 17th. Following deliberation, we have rendered the ruling as follows.
You testified to your belief that a reminder to vote did not contravene elections policy, and did not realize that votes would be biased by the attachment of your name and picture to the reminder. You also communicated your apology and removed the material in question upon receipt of the notice of allegation. In light of these circumstances, and the fact that this was limited to a single item, we find that you have committed an honest mistake which is insufficient in severity to constitute a major offense.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you wish to appeal this ruling, you must submit the appeal to the Independent Electoral Commission within two business days of receiving this notice, in accordance with Electoral Policy section J4(c)(iv).
Sincerely,
Marc Fontaine
Anna Belkine - March 19, 2010
Notice of IEC Ruling on Allegation of Major Offense
Anna,
The Independent Electoral Commission has concluded its investigation into allegations of your infraction against the electoral policy by defaming another candidate, acting maliciously against another campaign, and failing to remove campaign material during voting period. You were invited to respond to the allegations, at a meeting which took place on March 18th, a written statement was also received on March 17th. Following deliberation, we have rendered a ruling as follows.
Defamation and Malice
You stated that the comments posted in response to Ada’s note did not contain the requisite elements to legally constitute defamation, or, if containing them, were justified by lawful excuse. Since this is not a court of law, we cannot adjudicate the legal concept of defamation. For the purposes of Electoral Policy, you strongly and unjustifiably insinuated the incompetence or disinterest of another candidate. Furthermore, you strongly and unjustifiably insinuated that another candidate will act maliciously against the electoral process by using illegitimate means to gain office, in stating that “you still may win by playing on your personal connections”. While you testified that you did not intend this meaning, a reasonable person can be expected to foresee this interpretation. For these reasons, we find that you have committed a major offence under Electoral Policy section J3(c)(xvi).
In light of this finding, we do not believe the allegation of malice is sufficiently distinct to warrant discussion, we therefore find it redundant under these circumstances.
Campaign Material
You stated that you believe the following status messages did not contravene Electoral Policy: a message stating “I’m voting”; a comment in response to another comment, stating that he should vote for you; a link to the CJSF interviews; and a message opposing a referendum question. You also stated that the definition of electronic campaigning material was ambiguous. The Policy defines campaigning broadly, and includes direct or indirect solicitation of votes, as well as campaigning for or against parties in unrelated races.
The message stating “I’m voting”, and link to CJSF interviews, are both accompanied by your name and picture. These messages serve as reminders for people to vote, and association with your name biases potential ballots. The message in opposition to referendum clearly constitutes campaigning, and your comment, while in response to a non-SFU student, is plainly visible to SFU voters. You stated that this was clearly in jest, however this interpretation cannot reasonably be inferred from the context.
You also argued that status messages posted prior to the opening of polling cannot be considered campaigning during voting period. This is inconsistent with the standard and accepted interpretation of Policy, which considers all unremoved campaign material to constitute campaigning during voting period. All posters put up prior to voting must be taken down by the opening of polls, similarly, all electronic materials must be made unavailable by the opening of polls.
Contrary to your statement that electronic materials are difficult to take down, all offending materials may be removed by easily accessible buttons, requiring trivial effort. Neither the Policy, nor the Commission, requires that you remove material you are unable to control. Furthermore, while isolated instances of omission are insufficient to constitute a major offence, you have neglected to remove a significant number of campaign material for an extended period of time, despite the ease with which this could be done. The permissibility of such messages was clarified at the opening of polling, accompanied by an extended deadline for compliance. You have not provided a reasonable excuse for failing to act on time.
Given these facts, we find that you have committed a major offence under Electoral Policy section J3(c)(viii).
Interpretation of Policy
You proposed two alternate interpretations of the policy. You suggested that we should either penalize actions by non-candidates, or choose not to penalize your actions. You failed to note that Policy provides only for disciplinary action where the offending material is solicited, requested, on behalf of, and can reasonably be known and controlled by a candidate. In the absence of evidence suggesting that a candidate is directly or indirectly responsible, the Commission does not have jurisdiction over materials. If, however, we are made aware of a situation – such as if a candidate were to ask friends to campaign for them – we will investigate and take appropriate action. As the sole author of the comments and status messages, they undisputedly originate from yourself, and you are clearly in full control of their removal. You are therefore held accountable for them under Electoral Policy.
You then stated that the material in question did not cause any harm. This is irrelevant to the inquiry as Policy is concerned only with the acts of committing a major offence, not the impact thereof.
In light of our findings that you have committed major offences under sections J3(c)(viii) and J3(c)(xvi), you are hereby disqualified from the 2010 General Election of the Simon Fraser Student Society, pursuant to section J4 of the policy.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you wish to appeal this ruling, you must submit the appeal to the Independent Electoral Commission within two business days of receiving this notice, in accordance with Electoral Policy section J4(c)(iv).
Sincerely,
Marc Fontaine
Arry Dhillon - March 19, 2010
Notice of IEC Ruling on Allegation of Major Offense
Arry,
The Independent Electoral Commission has concluded its investigation into allegations of your infraction against the electoral policy by failing to remove campaign material during voting period. You were invited to respond to the allegations, at a meeting which took place on March 18th. Following deliberation, we have rendered a ruling as follows.
You did not remove three clearly visible status messages from your homepage, which contained reminders for students to vote. You testified that you did not consider these to be campaigning, since they did not directly solicit votes for yourself. However, your name and picture are attached to every message, biasing potential votes. Furthermore, the permissibility of reminders to vote was clarified on the opening of polling, accompanied by an extended deadline for compliance. You have not provided a reasonable excuse for failing to act on time.
You also failed to remove two messages promoting another candidate, as well as another message soliciting support. You stated that they were difficult to access due to being hidden by default. They are, in fact, easily accessible via the ‘old posts’ link, which requires almost no effort. The former messages clearly constitute campaigning, and all messages remained for a significant period of time beyond the extended deadline for removal.
In light of the easily accessible nature of these messages, numerous instances of infraction, and lack of mitigating circumstances, we are unable to excuse your gross oversight. We are therefore forced to find that you have committed a major offence under Electoral Policy section J3(c)(viii), resulting in your disqualification from the 2010 General Election of the Simon Fraser Student Society, pursuant to section J4 of the policy.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you wish to appeal this ruling, you must submit the appeal to the Independent Electoral Commission within two business days of receiving this notice, in accordance with Electoral Policy section J4(c)(iv).
Sincerely,
Marc Fontaine