Two CSU judicial board members who were removed from office at the beginning of October have been reinstated.
When the initial decision was made, CSU executives defended the move, which was widely considered a violation of the CSU’s bylaws, on the grounds that it opened space for new members on the judicial board. At the time there were four empty seats on the board.
The motion to restore Rawan Hadid and Tristan Teixeira to the board was introduced by councillor Shandell Jack at the CSU council meeting on Nov. 12. The vote, which was conducted by secret ballot, passed by a margin of 15 to four with one abstention.
“Saying that we want to offer students more chance to actually become members of the judicial board, that statement did not take into account there were already four spaces on the body,” said Jack. “And that their ability to serve for life, while I may not completely agree with that principle, it’s something that is currently on our books and should be respected.”
Councillor Amine Dabchy, who originally voted to remove the judicial board members, also spoke in favour of the motion, saying he regretted his previous vote.
There was some controversy as councillor Jessica Cohen suggested the previous decision could not be changed.
“I think in Robert’s Rules of Order there are certain actions that cannot be rescinded or amended,” said Cohen. “If someone was expelled from membership of office, it’s not possible for that to be rescinded.”
Robert’s Rules of Order, the rulebook that governs CSU council meeting, prohibits people from being returned to posts that they have been fired from, if they are not properly notified. However in any case where CSU bylaws conflict with Robert’s Rules of Order, the CSU bylaws take precedence.
CSU VP external Colin Goldfinch said the judicial board members had been notified after the decision.
However Teixeira, one of the removed judicial board members, disagreed. “No we were not officially notified of the action.”
While CSU bylaws and regulations do not provide guidelines specifically for removing judicial board members, in any cases where notice must be given – such as the impeachment of executives or the cutting of funding from student groups, between seven and 10 days advance notice must be given.
Teixeira, who had been the board’s chair, was happy with the decision.
“Given the final tally, I was happy,” said Teixeira, “I’m glad the vote passed with a solid majority.”
But he said the board’s problems don’t stop there, the judicial board has been without a phone or computer, in violation of CSU bylaws, since their office was moved from the Hall building to Loyola campus last year.
“We used to have all this stuff in our office, until we were moved,” said Texiera.
Council is challenged
– CSU council had to order pizza for the first time this year, as Wednesday’s council meeting stretched on for over six hours.
– Council members will be getting new CSU e-mail addresses. The addresses will be listed on the CSU website. The decision came after an hour of debate as councillors including Kaysy Marie Paolucci, worried that allowing constituents to easily contact their representatives would be dangerous. “There are going to be people who are advocates for certain things, who are going to attack us for things we do,” said Paolucci.
– A motion put forward by councillor Shandell Jack, that would have required candidates for the council, the executive, judicial board and chief electoral officer to have their student status verified by the dean of students office, was put on hold. The move comes two weeks after it was revealed that CSU chief electoral officer Jason Druker was not a student. CSU VP Colin Goldfinch, who said he supported the spirit of the motion, argued against the inclusion of the dean of students office on the grounds that putting a branch of the university’s administration in CSU regulations sets a bad precedent. “We don’t need to have any university department in our bylaws,” said VP communications Elie Chivi. Instead he argued that candidates be checked against the CSU’s membership list. This membership list is provided to the union by Concordia Administration. The motion was tabled to the custodial committee, which will review the wording of the motion and reintroduce it at the December council meeting.
