On Tuesday night, the GUSA Assembly voted not to certify the results of last month’s presidential election. Instead, the assembly agreed to move towards a new election for the organization’s executives. While this solution would usually be considered a worst-case scenario, there is nothing “usual” about GUSA, and it seems the best choice in this case. GUSA must now implement new bylaws before the next election that clearly delineate the procedures of election oversight.
The assembly made the right call by not certifying Murchison as the winner. This is no fault of Murchison—he ran a perfectly clean campaign—but rather a result of the strange circumstances surrounding Hibri’s disqualification. It is regrettable that the Assembly was forced to call for a new election, as this will certainly cause more headaches and more controversy. However, according to the current bylaws, the assembly had no choice.
As it stands, the assembly’s power extends only as far as certifying the election results. All oversight of the Election Commission is in the hands of the Election Appeals Board. However, the Appeals Board can only rule on issues of bias, not matters of procedure or bylaw. As such, the Appeals Board was unable to consider most of the arguments made by the Hibri/Greene ticket. The result was that the GUSA Assembly became a de facto appeals board.
The sensible solution is to expand the purview of the Appeals Board to procedural disputes. This would allow the Appeals Board to decide the validity of a disqualification and serve as the final word on all election matters. Once the matter is settled by the Appeals Board, the GUSA assembly would not have to face questions of procedure.
Giving the Appeals Board more oversight power will give the final results more legitimacy. The Election Commission is not a political body. It is separate from the GUSA Assembly and executives. It should not be the place of the Assembly to overrule the Election Commission. In the future, all matters of election oversight should remain separate from the Assembly. The Assembly’s only duty should be “rubber stamp” approval of the final decision of the commission or the Appeals Board.
Having a new election is never the best option. It nullifies everyone’s vote and erodes the legitimacy of the eventual winner. GUSA’s only hope of salvaging some form of credibility is to accompany a new election with a streamlined oversight process.
