Mass fraud allegations hit Union election winners

Asad Khan had votes deducted but still won

Allegations of mass electoral fraud sees last minute disciplinary meeting

Asad Khan and Mohammad Ali named in complaints seen exclusively by The Tab

Union panel docks Asad Khan one per cent of his votes

Fraud allegations have been levelled against victorious candidates of this week’s Union elections, Asad Khan and Mohammad Ali.

Asad, who will serve as the £25K-a-year Activities and Events Officer, had one per cent of his first preference votes docked after an official complaint was made to the Union.

11039704_10204977345251269_1755564016_n

Asad was docked votes after allegations of electoral fraud

A last minute disciplinary hearing held before the announcement of results yesterday said there was insufficient evidence to issue further sanction against Asad beyond docking one per cent of his votes.

The Union panel also decided “the allegations were unproven” in the case of Boxing Society President Mohammad Ali, who beat David Dahlborn to the Sustainability, Ethics and Operation Officer role.

Screen Shot 2015-03-06 at 15.05.42

The Union said there was not enough evidence of fraud to punish Ali

Both belong to the slate of candidates backed by Islamic Society, who won four of seven full-time sabbatical roles for 2015 – 2016.

Asad and Mohammad were also named in complaints seen by The Tab.

GC outcome letter (EDAH1401)

Complainants say Asad pressured students into logging in and voting for them on an iPad and secretly selecting co-campaigners for other roles.

Students complained when they received confirmation e-mails for votes they had not made.

One fresher said people canvassing on behalf of Asad came into his lecture with iPads and made him log-in without explaining it was part of election campaign.

When he handed the iPad back, the campaigners told him he had voted.

The fresher alleges the campaigners repeated the exercise with several other people in the lecture theatre as a means of fraudulently casting votes.

1957560_10204977385732281_1386173144_n

People’s legend Hannah Sketchley

Others describe being harassed and bullied into voting in the library – and being forced to vote right in front of campaigners without having the chance to vote for other candidates.

11022867_10204977276849559_1897542547_n

Union newcomer Mohammad Ali pulled a sucker punch against bookies favourite David Dahlborn

In an e-mail leaked to The Tab, Ali denied any wrongdoing and told Union Chair Mohammad Fahed: “I haven’t done that to any person and I have made sure to do this.”

“I have explicitly made a point to tell people that (sic) to log out in front of me and I haven’t done any votes where u (sic) walk out with their ipads (sic).”

Mohammad Ali and Asad Khan have not yet replied to The Tab’s request for comment.

More
The Tab London The Tab London News
  • Fuming@UCL

    The whole election was a sham and a farce, these people’s campaign teams have breached electoral rules and its disgusting that only 1% of votes were docked (which equates to around 18 votes…). If they have been found guilty of breaching the rules then they should be disqualified or given a serious penalty.

    • Bob

      1: Where is the evidence for this so called ‘breach of electoral rules’ which you claim
      2: 1% of the votes does not equate to around 18 votes
      3: They haven’t been found guilty hence they both won their positions in the elections

  • George

    Electoral fraud of ANY nature calls into question the legitimacy of a candidate, the Union and relevant committee’s should present all evidence to the voting population and have a re-vote, so the VOTERS can decide who they want to represent them in a fair election.

    • Bob

      1: First of all you should be aware that their where also fraudulent claims made against David D
      2: Clearly you do not know how the Union works
      3: Maybe you should consider running for something to gain a better understanding

      • You’re thick

        1. He didn’t doubt that
        2. He’s giving his opinion, not stating facts.
        3. Maybe you should read comments before replying to them.

        • Bob

          Alright George, no need to hide behind another name mate

  • Roy

    So Gabriel, lets just cut to the chase here, you were actively using the Tab to promote David Dahlbourne, did not even bother to contact the rest of the candidates. And now when results are out you cry and make a problem that does not exist. That is called being a sore loser.

    From what I saw, and the results on the UCLU website, David and Ella were not even close to catching up to these guys. Asad got 3x the amount of votes as Ella, and Mohamed more than double the amount of votes as David, if you are putting that down to electoral fraud, rather than them just having a far better campaign/team and larger pool of student support then you are looking for excuses to defame your opposition.

    Just take it like a man, you lost because they worked harder. I had people from every side of these elections coming up to me and pitching their candidate and asking if I could vote on the iPad, both David AND Alis team were doing this. I was approached FAR more by Ali’s team and this is why they won.

    Infact, one of the people approached me had convinced me to change one of my votes. So I see this article as total bullshit, votes can be changed so the only think in question here is the manpower and dedication of each campaign team.

    Getting a sense of “MUSLIMS TAKING OVER OUR UNION” from the Tab these days, which is a disgusting sentiment and quite frankly they form the largest minority group on campus, they seem to be the least politically apathetic and they deserve to have representation and because of that. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    #GetOverIt

    • Gabriel Pogrund

      Hey ‘Roy’. You can read whatever narrative you want into this. There is nothing to suggest ‘Muslims are taking over our union’ is mine.

      It’s our job to report on news. If two winning candidates are accused of fraud and a subsequent investigation is opened, then we’ll report on it.

      Pi Media observed the fraud allegation concerns those “specifically by candidates with Islamic Society affiliation.

      Either we’re all Islamophobic or, more likely, we’re reporting on what happened and you don’t like that fact, for whatever reason.

      You’ve also overestimated the extent to which we are personally invested in the elections – we are, rather, invested in making them amusing and reporting on them in a lighthearted way. By view figures, I can tell you we were successful in so doing.

      • Roy

        Dont try to sugar coat it mate, you used the Tab as a platform in a ridiculous baseless article to promote David Dahlbourne (lets just remind our selves that this article had nothing to do with his policies) and now you are using the Tab to defame the opponents of David.

        It’s actually a joke that you consider yourself “reporting on news”. The fact that you focus on what you personally want and like, and do not even give a slight mention to the fact that there was a HUGE difference in the campaign teams of each side, MAYBE just MAYBE the victory/defeat would come down to that and it deserves a mention to maintain the integrity of it being called “news”. But of course not, because the point of the things you have written isn’t to inform but to defame.

        Like I said, shame on you.

        • Gabriel Pogrund

          I addressed everything you’ve said in the first comment.

          If you care enough to write about student politics in this length, let us know. Our email’s editor@londontab.co.uk. Pi Media accept opinion pieces too.

          • Roy

            And I’ve addressed that your article is not impartial and your role at the tab is not to deliver impartial news. This is obvious and you have not addressed this. I take this as your acceptance of it.

            • Gabriel Pogrund

              To be fair, you’ve said something new in that last comment: the bit about delivering ‘impartial news’.

              Sorry, that’s your misunderstanding. We are very openly partisan.

              If you don’t like it, Pi’s compelled by its constitution to be impartial. Read them instead.

              • Roy

                So you admit the Tab is a platform, in this case, used to support David and discredit his opponents, and therefore it cannot be taken a credible and reliable source to see what happened. Therefore it is not news, as you so blazingly claimed earlier.

                I’m glad you are being honest with your readers at least.

                • Gabriel Pogrund

                  Nope.

                  1) I am drawing a distinction between a feature, which adequately describes our partisan piece on David (“It’s all about Dahlborn: Sweden’s sexiest man is running for Sabb”) and news, which is what we did today.

                  2) You’re a fool if you think being partisan amounts to not being news. Have you read a national newspaper before?

                  • Pabriel Gogrund

                    You know Dahlborn’s opponent won?

                    • Jamz

                      Omg :’) #Dead #Pabriel #IsThatYouYeah?

                  • John Owns You

                    Only fools here are the idiots who cry when they lose. Accept the loss and get over it. If David had won it would have been because he used iPads as well, difference is Davids team weren’t as united as Ali’s team. Ali’s team got votes for one another with the permission of the people (you cant force someone to pog in, and it’s mainly their fault if they dont make sure they log out after they voted for whoever they were convinced to vote for).

                    Stop defaming people and get a life, Mohammad Ali wasnt the one ripping down the opponents posters and playing dirty.

                    Now get over it and get a life while you’re at it.

      • Bob

        @Gabriel you are a toad

  • A. Hamza

    Takbir

  • James

    Take away 2000 votes and Asad Khan would still win. Regardless of the claims, he clearly had the best team and won because of the hard work that was put in. It is slightly disturbing not to mention very petty of the Tab to comment on something which they have no proof of.

  • Impartial advisor

    I really don’t think a union made of mostly Muslim sabbs is representative of the student body…
    In the victory photo of ISoc with past & present sabbs from their slate they’re wasn’t a single woman.
    Almost starting to miss the old days of good old predictable commies running the union.

    • S H

      Hi, ‘Impartial advisor’. Any student can run for office, no matter their religious beliefs.
      The photo you’re talking about was because the guys had a selfie-stick and were taking photos of themselves. There was a sizeable group of ISoc women at the results, and who were also part of the campaign team.
      I can see what you’re implying and you need to step back and look at facts – if you looked at the Sabbatical officers – this year, Wahida Samie and Amina Lunat, (two of the four ISoc candidates, who were successful in the elections) are women. In last year’s elections, Hajera Begum was supported by ISoc and she is a woman, too.

  • Pingback: Why should we care about our Sabb Officers?()

  • Pingback: 9 brilliant examples how BLOCKCHAIN can change the face of our universities | higheredperspective()