by Ajay Parasram

The policy of the Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA) banning students’ use of materials associated with the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS), as revealed in this issue of the Leveller, constitutes a serious breach of trust and violation of the right of political expression of students. CUSA executives have abused their authority by attempting to mass-censor the student body and have compromised the ability of Service Centres to serve their members.

To back up these measures, CUSA executives have threatened to discipline Service Centre coordinators if they do not police the attire of users of their Centres. More shockingly, sources close to the Leveller indicate Campus Safety has been called on more than one occasion to enforce this censorship on students.

The campaigns and materials in question, many of which have existed on campus for a decade or more, happen to be associated in one way or another with the CFS. They express the well-known anti-rape slogan “No Means No,” the currently active local “Challenge Homophobia and Transphobia” campaign, along with slogans in support of lower tuition fees and more financial support for students.

These materials express aspirations of students and are worn by hundreds of Carleton students daily. It is inconceivable that CUSA executives think they have a right to ban students’ political expression simply because they disagree with the outlook or origin of the materials. Regardless of where you sit on the spectrum, this in itself is a gross offense to students and something never before seen at Carleton.

The Leveller has closely covered campus politics from all angles since its inception, and it is necessary to point out that this policy contradicts the long-since productive relationships between CUSA executives, staff, and the student body. There is a system of mutual responsibility, and executives, within reasonable limits, work in partnership with the student unions’ service centres coordinators to set priorities, work on improving CUSA services, and ensure that each person upholds their responsibility to the students.

Service Centre Coordinators work with the student body at large to decide on which campaigns to engage in and which issues to work on. It is certainly not the job of executives to dictate this information to employees and students, nor to rule on what political expression may occur within the centres and CUSA space. It comes as some surprise that two highly respected Service Centre coordinators were replaced in early October for reasons that are not clear even to the former employees themselves.

Censorship of political expression by the CUSA executive is one part of a broad pattern of violation of students’ trust by the current executives. In order to jettison the existing health plan and enter into a different agreement, the CUSA executive redefined the meaning of “referendum.”

According to CUSA’s bylaws, a referendum of the student body is needed to violate the health plan contract and change providers suddenly. To get around this obstacle, the CUSA executive simply changed the meaning of referendum to be a “referendum” of the three CUSA signing officers, that is, a poll of the President Alexander Golovko, Vice President (VP) Finance Michael DeLuca, and VP Internal Maher Jebara.

The issue around the current CUSA executive is not a question of right or left wing clashes, rather, it is a matter of the abuse of executive power over the student body employing unprecedented and arbitrary bullying and censorship of all students’ right to political expression. Students’ representatives do not exist to impose their own political beliefs and limit students’ expression to what they personally approve of.

In previous years, students supportive of the CFS have been elected as CUSA executives, but did not use that position to ban material not originating from the CFS or even material highly critical of the CFS. Such a thing is completely outside the scope of the legitimate role of elected executives in CUSA.

Students of all political stripes are understandably disturbed upon finding out that CUSA executives have banned “No Means No” and other campaigns out of sheer political opportunism. CUSA executives must end this policy and publicly apologize for overstepping the bounds of their positions.

If they are unable to correct their mistake, students and CUSA councilors have the right and ability to recall intransigent executives determined to undermine students’ right to expression on campus.

This comment first appeared in the Leveller, Vol. 5, No. 2.