Revision of Student Association’s Code of Procedures pushed back to next semester
May 4, 2009
Click below to see different documents related to this article:
Plans to revise the Supreme Court of the Student Association’s Code of Procedure have been put on hold for the fall semester.
Matthew Venaas, the former speaker of the senate, and Chief Justice Eric Johnson, both agreed that more time was needed to examine the Code of Procedure and consider the revisions.
“We were concerned about rushing the process,” Venaas said. “While the proposal was a solid first step, we need to make sure that everyone has a chance to chime in on the proposal before it is approved, and there simply was not enough time to get sufficient feedback about the procedures before the end of the school year.”
In the bill brought to the senate floor to revise the code, it was stated there is no official Code of Procedure, nor has there ever been any substitute approved. The current Code of Procedure is from the 1970s and has not been revised since.
The reason for this planned update was caused by events surrounding this semester’s SA elections, during which Johnson, a candidate for student trustee, brought a complaint to the SA Supreme Court (Johnson stepped down from his position as chief justice temporarily to avoid a conflict of interest).
In his complaint, Johnson stated that his opponents, Venaas and Diara Fleming, had not filed their applications correctly and should have been disqualified from the election. Johnson was deemed by the court as not having any standing in his case and had to wait to re-file his complaint after the election, which Venaas had won.
Johnson had re-filed his complaint afterward, but the court did not meet to address the case as a justice’s objectivity was called into question by another justice.
The new Code of Procedure looks to address this issue, making changes like hearings being held not only at the discretion of the Chief Justice, but also by at least three of the justices. Another change is that any of the justices’ objectivity may be called into question and removed from a case with a vote of confidence.
Addressing and voting on these changes will be a joint committee made up of senators, justices and members of the executive staff.
Johnson will remain as Chief Justice and looks to cooperate with the committee to enact the revisions.
“I hope to work with both the speaker and Matthew in the fall,” Johnson said. “I think it’s important because the rules haven’t been looked at in so long.”
