During the annual election week, when students elect representatives for both the University and Faculty Councils, candidates must adhere to a code of conduct set down by the university. They are not allowed to send unsolicited online messages to fellow students, campaign in classrooms, or influence students while they are voting on their phone or laptop.
However, those rules are too brief and vague, which threatens the integrity of the elections, said Stepan Kunevich, vice president of KAN, when he addressed the University Council last week during the council meeting’s speakers’ quarter. According to him, some parties take advantage of this every year by operating in a grey area, which raises a dilemma for others: do the same or lose votes.
When asked, Kunevich told Observant that it is DOPE in particular which tests the boundaries – and sometimes crosses them. For example, one candidate for the Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience (FPN) council sent hundreds of fellow students a personal message on WhatsApp right when the polls opened. DOPE members were also said to be pushy when approaching voters outside university buildings. “Many students have told us they felt uncomfortable.”
During a phone call, DOPE chair Jop Smeets said he does not agree with this description. “I do think that, in general, we have more extroverted, direct candidates who actively approach students. That’s part of elections, I feel. It is certainly not the intention to be pushy, but we have heard from some people that they actually appreciate our enthusiasm.” The FPN candidate had indeed made a mistake, he acknowledged, “but once we received complaints about her messages to fellow students, we immediately asked her to delete them. With dozens of candidates, there is every chance that someone will make a mistake – it’s impossible for the board to maintain oversight over everybody.” Yes, the rules could be clearer, said Smeets, “but you can’t cover every eventuality, there has to be room to campaign”.
That view is echoed by Niels Harteman, Secretary to the Central Election Office. “There is always a grey area. We discuss the code of conduct with the parties every year, and yet, every election, we receive complaints about candidates’ behaviour. It’s an emotional period, parties react to each other’s actions. Enforcement remains a focus area, but it is also difficult. We can’t constantly police the buildings. When we receive a complaint, we immediately speak to the party or candidate in question.”
There have not been any more complaints than usual this year, said Harteman. “We will evaluate them soon and decide whether sanctions are appropriate.” That could be in the form of a reduction in the ‘election budget’ of €1000 that each party receives, although according to Harteman, it would have to be a “severe infringement” to lose the entire amount.
Kunevich thinks that punishment is too light, because parties would be able to survive on other income. He called for the U-Council to consider the idea of stricter rules and sanctions. If the council agrees, Harteman sees “no problem discussing adjustments. But I still hope parties will use their common sense. Misconduct might also affect the voters, and the turnout is already low as it is.”