|Let's examine the facts.|
|What's going on?|
Also you may have heard that Sarah Jane has issued a complaint of electoral misconduct, this is true. However what you may not know is that the complaint does not have anything to do with the fact that SJ lost the election. Her claim is that the election is invalid because in an argument before the election took place Sarah Jane has alleged that Antonia Jade told people not to vote for her and that this put her at an unfair disadvantage during the election.
|All this exclusive info is courtesy of information from people who were there.|
I've had a gander at the Royal Holloway SU rules on elections and voting (you can see it here). Although it clearly states '12.2 Any full member of the Students’ Union is eligible to assert a complaint, even if they be a Candidate or Campaign Team Member' I'm really unsure what grounds Sarah Jane has in issuing a complaint. This is because, be it through an argument or not, what Sarah Jane is asserting is canvassing of opinion, which is completely legitimate.
Indeed the Royal Holloway SU guidelines says '5.1 Publicity and canvassing shall be allowed by candidates. This shall not interfere with Students' Union or College facilities or be posted in polling areas.' and that '5.2 All statements made during the election period must be factually correct, accurate and provable when questioned. Misrepresentation of other candidates is prohibited. This includes all publicity, manifestos and speeches / answers given by candidates.' If SJ has any basis for her complaint it would be in the term 'misrepresentation' which if you stretch the meaning as a stand alone word may possibly construe the alleged actions as misrepresentation. The chances of that being acceptable however is slim because the meaning specifically refers to false information. 'Don't vote for Sarah Jane' isn't really an information statement.
|Hectic days ahead for the democracy office at Royal Holloway SU.|