Photo C/O Catherine Goce
On Sept. 22, the Student Representative Assembly voted to de-ratify the McMaster Chinese Students and Scholars Association due to concerns that the club’s actions had endangered members of the community. An investigation by the Silhouette has found that there had been several instances of miscommunication in the months leading up to the de-ratification.
During the summer, the Student Representative Assembly were under the impression that MAC CSSA would be under probation during the 2019-2020 academic year. However, this was not the case. Miscommunication between members of the SRA and some MSU staff members led to MAC CSSA being ratified as an MSU club on July 21 without first being placed on probation. On Sept. 22, MAC CSSA was de-ratified due to reasons unrelated to this miscommunication.
Every summer, the Clubs Administrator provides the SRA with a list of groups to recommend for MSU club status, highlighting any groups that require additional monitoring. On June 18, Clubs Administrator Aditi Sharma released a memo that recommended 327 student groups for MSU club status. The memo drew attention to two McMaster clubs: MAC CSSA and LifeLine.
“Two returning clubs (CSSA & Lifeline) are marked with a double asterisk (**) which indicates certain issues that came up during the year and supplemental details for those issues,” Sharma states in the memo.
The supplemental details that Sharma was referring to, titled “Clubs Ratification Supplemental Info #2 - CSSA and Lifeline”, provides some background on the clubs. It highlights concerns that members of MAC CSSA had endangered an activist who spoke on campus about human rights issues for Uighur Muslims in China on Feb. 11. The document gives no indication that MAC CSSA was to be put on probation.
Putting a club on probation allows the MSU to monitor the group’s activities and evaluate the need for further disciplinary action. According to the MSU Clubs Operating Policy, if clubs are found guilty of certain offenses, they may be placed on a period of probation. During this period, the club is required to report all future events and meetings to the Clubs Administrator. If the club is found to violate the rules again, it is subject to disciplinary action.
During the June 23 SRA meeting, a motion was put forward to ratify new and returning MSU clubs as recommended by the Clubs Administrator for the 2019-2020 academic year. An amendment to this motion was put forward to ratify all clubs with the exception of MAC CSSA, McMaster Chinese News Network, McMaster Chinese Graduate Students Society and McMaster Chinese Professional Association. A motion to postpone this discussion to the July 21 SRA meeting was passed 19-1, citing the need for more information.
On July 21, the SRA voted 17-1 to ratify all new and returning MSU clubs as recommended by the Clubs Administrator for the 2019-2020 academic year. MAC CSSA was ratified without any probationary period, since the Clubs Administrator had not recommended that they be placed on probation.
Email correspondence in preparation for an SRA meeting almost two weeks later indicated that there was an assumption that MAC CSSA had been placed on probation. In reality, however, nowhere do the meeting minutes state that MAC CSSA had been placed on probation.
On Aug. 12, Administrative Services Coordinator Victoria Scott sent an email to an SRA member in which she mistakenly stated that MAC CSSA was on probation.
“. . .I can tell you now that the Chinese Students and Scholars Association’s ratification was contingent on providing outstanding information, plus they are on probation for six months,” said Scott in her email.
“One more clarification! They are on probation, but there wasn’t a time set,” Scott clarified through a second email that she sent the same day.
Both clarifications were incorrect.
“In my August 12 email to [an SRA member], I incorrectly referenced a memo from the Clubs Department that was circulated in June to the SRA,” said Scott, when asked by the Silhouette on Nov. 5 where she obtained the information on CSSA’s probation.
Neither MAC CSSA’s probation nor the length of time for a probationary period are mentioned in the Clubs Department’s June memo.
On Aug. 14, an SRA member, who asked to remain anonymous, sent an email to MSU President Josh Marando to clarify MAC CSSA’s privileges including their access to MSU resources and the club’s ability to attend ClubsFest.
“Towards the end of our meeting [on Aug. 13], I believe [one SRA member] had asked about the BoD [Board of Directors] about the current situation with [MAC] CSSA, to which they replied that as of now, the CSSA does not have access to MSU resources . . .” said the SRA member in the email.
“I know the end of the SRA meeting got quite confusing, I was confused as well so I apologize for that. [MAC] CSSA is currently under probation this year, which means they must keep clubs admin informed of all events they hold, are watched more closely, and will face serious consequences in the instance of another infraction,” replied Marando over email.
It is unclear whether both the SRA member and Marando are referring to an informal meeting, or whether records of this meeting are missing from the August 13 SRA meeting minutes, as this was an emergency meeting called to revoke the Dominion’s Society club status.
Almost three weeks later, on Sept. 3, the same SRA member sent a follow-up email regarding MAC CSSA’s supposed probation, which both Scott and Marando had confirmed earlier via email.
“I wanted to ask — why exactly was the CSSA put on probation? I’m not sure if I missed it, but I don’t think it was ever clear about the reason behind this [decision],” asked the SRA member. “In addition, I don’t believe that there is actually any explicit record of the CSSA being disciplined.”
“I believe the terms this year are that all events go through the Clubs Administrator as well as conditions surrounding ratification should they breach policy this year. That said, I don’t fully know,” replied Marando, offering to check and meet with the Clubs Department after ClubsFest.
After at least one month of miscommunication, on Sept. 13, Marando clarified that the Clubs Department had recommended LifeLine to be ratified contingent on a probationary period, but had not recommended this for MAC CSSA.
“I am still following up with the minutes of the meeting as they haven’t been released yet, so I would interpret it as LifeLine’s probation still stands, but the CSSA one should be put forward again [...] Again, I’m still confirming to be 100%, but I would say it’s probably best to go ahead and put forward the CSSA probation motion again at the September 22 [SRA] meeting,” clarified Marando in his email on Sept. 13.
In an SRA Facebook group message following the Sept. 22 SRA meeting, Marando acknowledged the miscommunication surrounding MAC CSSA’s probation and apologized for the confusion.
“Regarding the confusion and mistakes made regarding the CSSA not being informed at the meeting and the initial probation. Overall, both are big oversites [sic], but please understand that they were not intentional by any means and we have put plans to ensure they do not happen again,” said Marando in the Facebook chat.
When asked about this miscommunication at the Nov. 3 SRA meeting, Marando stated that he believed everyone on the SRA was under the impression that the Club Department’s recommendation of probation applied to MAC CSSA, as well as LifeLine.
“It was really a procedural error,” said Marando.
This was the first time that he publicly acknowledged the issue of miscommunication pertaining to the CSSA’s supposed probation.
“Trying to rectify moving forward in terms of making sure that motions are more specific when it comes to ratifying clubs also, we are doing a full review of the clubs application process through our Internal Governance committee,” said Marando.
In the President’s Report, Marando states that club policy review is ongoing.
“Overall, I am hoping to have a bulk of the policy writing time in December, with conversations happening during November. We are looking at how funding works, improvements to [re-ratifications], how and who ratifies clubs, the Club Executive Council, and what qualifies a recognized club,” stated Marando in the report.
Time will tell the impact any changes made to club policies will have on future communication within the MSU.
Content warning: white supremacy
At an emergency meeting last night, the Student Representative Assembly voted unanimously to de-ratify the Dominion society due to concerns that the club had neglected to disclose its affiliation with an external organization with alleged ties to xenophobic individuals.
The Dominion society was ratified alongside 337 other clubs at the July 24 SRA meeting. Prior to ratification, concerns were raised about the club’s affiliations, but SRA members stated that they had no way to verify these claims.
Two days after the club was ratified, an anonymous Twitter thread published photographs of the Dominion society leader attending events hosted by the MacDonald cultural and historical society, an external organization with no stated ties to McMaster. The thread also showed pictures of other people attending the group’s events, and posted screenshots of explicitly xenophobic comments that these individuals had allegedly made in private Facebook groups.
The Dominion society, formerly called the MacDonald society, states that its aim is to celebrate Canadian culture and history. The leader of the Dominion society denies that the club has any connection to white supremacist individuals or organizations.
The release of information sparked considerable community backlash. The day after the Twitter thread was posted, McMaster students union president Josh Marando issued a statement urging SRA members to de-ratify the club in light of the new information.
During the emergency meeting last night, Marando reiterated that he had recommended de-ratification because the Dominion society did not disclose its alleged ties to the MacDonald cultural and historical society, and because people tied to that organization had allegedly expressed white supremacist beliefs.
Despite a delayed start while waiting to meet quorum, the meeting lasted only 15 minutes. All SRA members who spoke during the meeting agreed that the club should not be allowed to exist on campus.
For SRA (arts & science) representative Catherine Hu, this incident highlights the need to reform the ratification process so that the same thing does not happen again.
“If we have adjustment to our policy of how we go about ratifying clubs, it would solidify why we should or should not ratify certain clubs,” said Hu.
SRA (social science) member Vania Pagniello stated that the SRA needs to take concerns of white supremacy more seriously. Pagniello noted that, while not explicit, there were warning signs in the Dominion society’s application that warranted closer investigation. In previous meetings, concerns were raised about the club’s plans to run events celebrating Canadian colonial history, given Canada’s history of colonization and state violence.
“In the future we need to be a lot more thoughtful and stringent about the people that we’re giving resources to,” stated Pagniello.
The vote to de-ratify the Dominion society was unanimous.
“We made a mistake, but we’re going to fix it,” said SRA (science) representative Armand Acri.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
Photo C/O Kyle West
By: William Li
Content Warning: White supremacy
On July 21, the Student Representative Assembly briefly discussed concerns about clubs engaging in foreign surveillance and white supremacy — but in a shocking move, put these concerns aside and simply ratified all proposed clubs anyway, triggering an intervention just three days later by McMaster Students' Union President Josh Marando.
Although Marando’s quick response to concerns of white supremacy and threats to marginalized students is a good start, this incident remains problematic: Why did the SRA ratify the Dominion society in the first place, even though these exact concerns were brought up in the SRA meeting prior to the ratification vote?
Currently, the clubs administrator processes club applications and provides a list of clubs to the SRA, which usually votes to approve all at once. However, the clubs administrator is an unelected person, and they are historically either unwilling or unable to act when clubs promote or endorse actions that put students at risk.
For example, they declined to take action in February, when the McMaster Chinese Students and Scholars Association (CSSA) publicly declared that they reported an event on campus to the Chinese government for discussing China’s human rights violations against Uighur Muslims. Soon, there were international headlines and concerns that such surveillance on campus puts Uighur and Chinese students at risk, since criticism of the Chinese Communist Party is often grounds for imprisonment in China.
The clubs administrator then took months to prepare a memo in response, which the SRA quickly overlooked as they re-ratified the CSSA at their July 21 meeting without addressing the memo’s concerns of surveillance and harassment.
The still-unresolved CSSA fiasco is a great example of how the Dominion society is not a one-time thing, but rather, just the latest symptom of a much more serious problem: the MSU’s glaring inability to manage clubs, and an urgent need for major reform.
Although we have a new clubs administrator now, the systemic issues with this model of governance persist: the SRA expects the clubs administrator to manage problematic clubs, but the clubs administrator does not do much beyond preliminary research and providing information to the SRA upon request.
The result is that nobody does anything. Anybody who can successfully fill out forms simply gets stamped and approved. Clubs get away with everything from foreign surveillance to peddling false medical information, while MSU officials busy themselves tossing political hot potatoes at one another.
We saw such political runaround in action when SRA members tried asking clarifying questions about certain clubs, and the clubs administrator wrote in their response, “I strongly recommend ratifying the majority of clubs such that the MSU Clubs Department can move forward with our activities for the year. If there are still concerns about certain clubs, it would be better to bring your questions directly to them.”
Given this apparent urgency for SRA members to stop bothering the clubs administrator with questions about clubs and just move on, there should be no surprise that the Dominion society escaped the proper scrutiny that should have happened before—rather than after—the rushed ratification vote.
While the SRA and clubs administrator have rightfully gotten flak over these decisions, we must remember that the problem is systemic. The clubs administrator job description does not explicitly require them to supervise clubs, ensure truthfulness in club applications or even enforce the clubs operating policy. Meanwhile, the SRA appears ill-equipped to pick up the slack on this front.
In order to address this, the SRA should not simply rubber stamp whatever is put in front of them by the clubs administrator; rather, they should take the time to do research and get fully informed before voting. Additionally, as our elected representatives, they should make the political decisions that the clubs administrator cannot, which includes exercising their power to withhold club status.
Although some may argue that revoking club status should not be used as a tool for censorship, we must remember that club status is a privilege, not a right. If clubs expect to access funding, ClubSpace and other such perks paid for with student fees, then the SRA should hold clubs to the same standard as other MSU departments.
Next, the SRA must revisit the rushed July 21 ratification vote and actually scrutinize clubs properly (perhaps at the emergency meeting that Marando has called for, though it remains to be scheduled). Instead of having the MSU President intervene each time there is a problem or waiting for issues to blow up in the media, the SRA should proactively resolve issues. The consequences of inaction can be clearly seen in how Chinese nationalists have instigated violence on other university campuses, while white nationalists have been provoking violence right here in Hamilton.
Finally, in the long-term, we need systemic change. Even though the clubs operating policy was recently amended in June, the updated policy quickly flopped in action when it failed to prevent the Dominion society ratification about-face. Furthermore, even Human Rights Watch has felt compelled to provide recommendations for more substantial change to address the Chinese government’s threats to academic freedom. The recent amendment’s stunning failure, the recommendations from HRW, and Marando’s intervention show that band-aid solutions will be insufficient — the entire clubs operating policy is no longer viable and must be overhauled.
The SRA must now show leadership so that these troubling incidents do not happen again. If nothing significant is done, then this cycle — where the MSU condones clubs that endanger students and then pauses to reflect only after enough controversy is attracted — will simply continue.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
