Volume 94, Issue 37

Friday, November 3, 2000


Schools scrutinize codes of conduct

Unruly student houses raise a stink

Ombuds office gives annual report card

Case closes on elections skirmish

Parliament Hill turns into Beverly Hills 90210

Memoial University still a ghost town

Case closes on elections skirmish

By Aaron Wherry
Gazette Staff

After three and a half hours of heated debate Wednesday night, the University Students' Council passed two motions aimed at resolving the issue of Legal Society president Michael Rubinoff's possible campaign violations.

In the first motion, the USC mandated the elections committee to investigate and suggest possible procedures and disciplinary actions with reference to mass e-mails and endorsements by third parties, to be included in the USC's By-law No.2.

In the second motion passed by council, the USC recognized Rubinoff was acting in the best interest of law students, but also acknowledged he did not act in the best interests of the USC. The second motion also concluded no further disciplinary action would be taken in this matter.

Jeffrey Clayman, USC legal affairs officer and chair of the election committee, said the council and the elections committee experienced a great deal of confusion in dealing with this matter and both parties used Wednesday's meeting as a learning experience.

"Judging from the debate in council, there seems to be some uncertainty with what Mr. Rubinoff was being charged with," he said. "In future, hopefully council will be more direct in asking for the information they need and the committees of council will be more direct with what they are seeking."

Outgoing student senator, Marc Chernoff, who first proposed the second motion passed by council, said the USC's decision was the best council could expect. "I think that with the facts presented, that's the best we could do."

Chernoff added he was glad the issue had been resolved and no more of council's time would be wasted, as it should be focused on bigger issues.

He also explained the motion clearly explained members of the USC have a responsibility to council. "As much as your first duty is to the Legal Society, you're still responsible to the council."

Western Board of Governors representative, Joel Adams, said the entire affair was negative for council. "I think it's unfortunate that it ever occurred the way it did," he said. "I'm still quite disappointed it became a personal issue and an individual was singled out for the actions of an entire group."

Adams said he was worried there might be a negative impact on other faculty presidents because of the way Rubinoff was treated. "There's a danger that if people aren't careful, faculty presidents may not be willing to participate in the USC as much."

Rubinoff said he felt vindicated by the outcome of Wednesday's meeting. "I've been an elected official on campus for five years. I have always and will always, serve the best interests of my constituents."

Rubinoff refused to comment on whether or not he is still pursuing legal action against the USC in the matter.

To Contact The News Department:

Copyright The Gazette 2000