The V.O.I.C.E. Initiative is scheduled to head back to trial April 30 after new charges against it were accepted by the ASUC Judicial Council Wednesday.
The charge sheet — filed by ASUC President Vishalli Loomba and ASUC Attorney General Deepti Rajendran — alleges that the initiative violates the policies of the ASUC. The referendum asked students to pay $2 per semester to support The Daily Californian.
The charges were filed after the Judicial Council ruled Tuesday to overturn the executive order Loomba issued invalidating the initiative on April 11. Loomba said the initiative would create a bad precedent that would allow campus funds to be transferred to noncampus entities.
When considering Loomba’s order, the council was not asked to rule on the legality of the student fee initiative and said its decision to overturn the executive order “will in no way be construed as a validation or invalidation of V.O.I.C.E.”
The new charge sheet contains the same allegations as the original charge sheet Rajendran filed April 11 and pushes “for a punishment that entails disqualification from the current ASUC Election.”
The charge sheet also states that the council should make its decision without a hearing because it will be “far too rushed, disabling parties from adequately preparing.”
Tuesday night, Elections Council chair Pamudh Kariyawasam announced that the initiative received the necessary simple majority to pass, with 5,977 students voting in favor and 4,054 students voting to not support the fee.
Briefs, evidence and witness lists for the hearing must be submitted by 5 p.m. on April 28, according to ASUC Judicial Council chair Erica Furer.
Chloe Hunt is the lead student government reporter.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
Although the Daily Cal representation acted victorious when Loomba was judged as incorrect, I very much looking forward to real justice being served when the Judicial Council overturns this horrible referendum. If the Daily Cal wants to be a separate entity (which I wholeheartedly believe it should be), then it needs to accept that fact and become self-sustaining financially.
Trim the fat. Make it online only. Publicize more through facebook.
The charge sheet also states that the council should make its decision
without a hearing because it will be “far too rushed, disabling parties
from adequately preparing.”
Why will it be too rushed? There is no compelling reason to rush through this – remember it was just ruled that Loomba’s executive order was not justified through exigency.
Loomba and Rajendran just revealed themselves to be cut from the very same cloth as the campus administration. They are generally full of shit, and have no respect for accountability through established process when those processes represent a risk of not getting their way.