SUBU candidates were disqualified for budget overspend and forcing people to vote in elections

We now have the full line-up of SUBU officers for next year after months of rumoured disqualifications, foul play and votes of no confidence.

Candidates had been disqualified for overspending on their budgets and standing over people until they voted for them, The Tab can confirm.

On Monday, the final officers were announced on SUBU social media pages which should conclude an eventful few months.

SUBU dropped the bombshell on their Facebook page ‘Introducing two new Union Officers’ which came as a shock after all of the officer positions had seemingly been filled back in March.

In another post by SUBU called ‘Let’s talk about the SUBU Elections’,  it was said that: “SUBU has been dealing with a number issues relating to candidates, and due to the complexity of the situation, has not been able to comment.

“However, we feel that we owe you, the students, an honest and transparent explanation of everything that has happened with regards to the elections.”

The Trustee Board were asked to intervene following a number of complaints about candidate conduct – this was looked into by the Elections Committee.

Two candidates were then disqualified because of overspending on their allocated campaign budgets and because they had acted inappropriately during campaigning – breaching principles two and five, and rule 17 of the election rules.

Our investigation revealed that they spent more than the budget of £50 given to them or split their resources with another candidate.

Principle two is that candidates must treat other candidates, staff and the public with respect.

Principle five is that they should respect the campus environment and not act in a way that could bring the election, the university or the union into disrepute.

Rule 17 is that no candidate should stand over someone whilst voting or supply them with a device to vote on i.e. watch them until they vote for you.

All three candidates appealed. An independent panel recommended that the Trustee Board should override the decision and the disqualifications should still stand.

The Trustee Board decided that for VP Community and VP Education, where the disqualifications resulted in the first-placed candidate no longer being able to take up office, the second-place candidate should take office.