WHAT HAPPENED?
The Hall VI HEC (Hall Executive Committee) Elections – scheduled to be conducted on 2nd March 2023 – were cancelled just 30 minutes before the polling was set to begin – on the recommendation of the outgoing HEC!
In an email received by the residents of H6, the Warden In-Charge of Hall VI informed that she endorsed the recommendation of the outgoing HEC to cancel the elections for the post of President, Hall 6, and that renominations would be sought when elections are conducted at a later date (post 15 March). [1]
WHY WERE THE ELECTIONS CANCELLED?
The outgoing President of H6 claimed that both the candidates contesting for President, H6 were severely under-prepared. For example, she recounted that one of the candidates did not know who the hall warden was during the soapbox, while the other named the hall manager when asked. Based on multiple such instances, the Warden In-Charge, in consultation with the HEC, decided to not have the elections with such a low level of preparation and instead give the candidates more time to prepare.
The President also claimed that there were far too many similarities between the manifestos of the Hall VI and Hall V HEC candidates (where HEC elections were recently concluded). She further added that there were eerie similarities between the manifestos of the two candidates as well – for example, both of them had coincidentally forgotten to include any plans on festivities, cultural activities and hall day, but included them in the budget. [2] [3]. The President alleged that it was the CEO’s (Chief Election Officer, H6 Elections) responsibility to look at these issues during ratification of manifestos but they were overlooked.
ALLEGATIONS
According to the Chief Election Officer (CEO) for H6 HEC elections, the two presidential candidates were ‘unfairly’ accused by the outgoing HEC, of plagiarising manifestos of Hall 5 HEC candidates and were repeatedly asked to take back their nominations. When the candidates did not comply, the Hall President called one of them to her room and asked her to step down for reasons such as going for a summer internship and not having a good enough CPI, alleged one of the candidates.
AS IT HAPPENED
The CEO claimed that after the soapbox, the HEC asked her to shift the polling day. When she did not comply, an HEC member screamed at her and forced her to make the change. This was reverted back to the original date once the Students’ Gymkhana intervened.
When asked for comment, the Hall President told us, “The HEC discussed that the candidates got only 2 days for campaigning – on one of which most of them had an exam, so they should be given another day for campaigning. Since we did not find any rule against this in the Code of Conduct, we approached the CEO with this proposal. The CEO of H6 elections had initially agreed to send out an email, but later reneged after talking to the CEO of the Election Commission. When we appointed a CEO, we placed trust in her, but when we realised that she was being unduly influenced by a senior, the scenario changed.”
It may be noted that the CEO of the Election Commission was the proposer of one of the candidates. The outgoing President believes this shouldn’t have been allowed at the time of filing nominations, but the CEO of H6 elections overlooked this as well.
As a last resort, the HEC approached the Warden In-Charge and recommended that the elections for the post of President be cancelled. The CEO and the candidates were not made aware of this and only got to know of the cancellation once they received the email.
After the email was sent, the CEO met the Warden to ask for the rationale behind cancelling the elections. The Warden allegedly said that the candidates were ‘ill-prepared’ and hence, she was giving them more time to prepare. Vox team contacted the warden to confirm the statement and ask for a comment. However, we did not receive a reply by the time of publication.
CANDIDATES SAY
Both the presidential candidates have denied copying from Hall 5 HEC manifestos and further asserted that their manifestos were ratified by the CEO (Chief Election Officer).
“I believe such scrapping of elections is extremely undemocratic because if we were genuinely incapable of winning the elections, then NOTA would have prevailed. That decision should be taken by the GBM and not the HEC. If they just want the person they like to be the next president, then why hold elections at all? Just take interviews”, one of the candidates told us.
VOX OPINION
Several questions need to be confronted in this regard: What should be the extent of involvement or influence of the outgoing HEC during HEC elections? Are they supposed to make value judgment on the under-preparedness of the candidates? Or is it for the GBM (General Body Members) to decide if the candidates are good enough? Even if the candidates are under-prepared, is it under the HEC’s or Warden’s mandate to call off the elections, without the consent of the Chief Election Officer?
Vox opines that the incident in Hall 6 points to the sheer disregard of the democratic spirit of elections. It, moreover, sets a dangerous precedent for the years to come because
(a) Arbitrary justifications may be used against candidates disfavoured by the outgoing HEC
(b) The Warden assumed the authority to cancel the elections without consulting the Chief Election Officer of the Hall or giving the candidates a chance to disagree.
Written by: Kunaal Gautam, Mutasim Khan
Edited by: Ayush Anand
Design by: Sachidanand Navik
No Comments
Leave a comment Cancel