“The Tribunal finds that the election process was not fair nor democratic,” the decision said, “the student body was denied the opportunity for a fair and democratic election.”
The scathing seven page document released on the 21st of September criticises the QUT Guild’s actions and calls for another election to be held this month, placing elections between the 22nd and 24th of October over the three campuses.
The electoral tribunal reviewed an appeal submitted by students in opposing parties, who say they were denied the opportunity to run against incumbents EPIC, resulting in their uncontested win.
Most poignantly, the tribunal panel said “we are comfortably satisfied that there were a number of factors established from the evidence which gave credence to the conclusion that the election had not been properly conducted.”
EPIC posted a statement on their Facebook page soon after the tribunal results were published, describing the findings.
“The Electoral Tribunal has held that, despite both the QUT Guild and the Returning Officer complying with all formal matters required under the QUT Guild Regulations, the lack of any other party nominating is grounds to call a new election,” the post said.
This alludes to the idea that the reason for finding the election undemocratic was the lack of competition, despite the fact that the tribunal gave numerous examples for why they reached their conclusion.
One example was minutes from the two council meetings before the election, showing no discussion of election dates, something the tribunal found “curious”.
The panel also condemns Guild Secretary Emily McIntyre for claiming the choice of date for the election was solely her decision.
“We do not accept that that power can be acted upon in isolation and without consultation or debate…her duty was to consult and inform.”
Additionally, the tribunal panel refers to the Guild’s announcement of the election, which they incorrectly said was only posted on the Guild office’s noticeboard.
In fact, the Guild posted on their Facebook page announcing both the opening and closing of nominations.
The decision said this was “absolutely at odds with the constitution’s requirement that the elections be conducted in a free and democratic manner.
“We are not satisfied that the minor notification published on 6 August is in any way sufficient to bring to the notice of the student body that an election was pending.”
Discussion of relevant election dates not necessary in council meetings, according to Guild President Isobella Powell
A few hours before the tribunal hearing, I sat down with the Guild President.
When asked why the nomination or election dates were not discussed in the two council meetings before the election, Powell said “I don’t think it’s really necessary.”
Ms Powell then corrected herself, saying “I don’t think it’s in the regulations so the guild secretary wouldn’t have been prompted to do so.”
Vinnie Batten, primary organiser of opposition party Reach, agrees with the tribunal that this goes against the secretary’s responsibility.
“In their official responses, EPIC have highlighted that the decision to hold the election earlier this year, compared to those immediately previous, was a result of feedback from students and opposition in regards to the timing of the mid-semester break,” he said.
“If student consultation was brought into the equation, surely the executive thought a council meeting would be an opportune time to share those findings.”
In the 2017 Guild budget report, $235,782 was spent on media and promotion, including $96,320 on the Universe magazine.
After the nominations period had closed on the 10th of August, the first announcement post had two likes and the second had none, which is still the case.
Ms Powell claims that the combined reach of the two posts was around 3000 people at the time, with about 2500 on the first.
The tribunal’s decision demanded announcements for the new election to be “clearly displayed on all social media platforms utilised by the Guild.”
Carl Jackson, primary organiser of opposing party Socialist Alternative, commented on this post, saying “it’s almost like last time you didn’t want anyone to know it was happening.”
President Powell, Secretary McIntyre and Campaign Manager Aenghas Hopkinson-Pearson did not respond to requests for comments.
Blair Speak 