As previously reported on by The Cascade, UFV’s Revolutionary Communist Student Club (RCSC) was initially suspended on Jan. 14 by the Student Union Society (SUS) for breaching their Clubs and Associations Guidelines. However, they were later placed on probation on Jan. 23, after their appeal was submitted to and reviewed by SUS. During an interview with The Cascade, RCSC’s founder and President, Jordan Holmes, expanded on the events leading to the disciplinary action taken on the club.
“At the end of the day, we were just appealing to the SUS. We were trying to go about this democratically.”
The original suspension happened following the UFV Campus Engagement Expo held on Jan. 14 when the Communist Club distributed pamphlets petitioning to organize a student strike following in the steps of Canadian Federation of Students Nova Scotia’s (CFS-NS) strike planned for March. The student strike coordinated by CFS-NS, called for a reduction in tuition and other university related issues.
“We’re fighting for lower tuition. We’re fighting for affordable housing. We’re fighting for divestment from war industries, from mining industries, from a lot of these awful, harmful industries.”
Holmes distributed the pamphlets and gathered signatures from sympathising students to later present to SUS, however, the pamphlet contained wording that SUS President Bilal Faisal Faheem pointed out potentially conveyed the idea that SUS was already on-board with the movement, when this was not the case. Holmes said that he and Faheem had a brief chat where Faheem requested the wording on the pamphlet be corrected before further distribution, which Holmes confirmed was done immediately after the request.
SUS later contacted Holmes through email to notify of the guideline infringements committed by RCSC, which included Misrepresentation of Authority, Failure to comply with SUS Governance and Politics, Improper use of Communications and Platforms, and Abuse of Club Politics. RCSC was also given the opportunity to appeal before any further disciplinary action was taken in accordance to section 16.3 of the guidelines, which reads:
“All Clubs & Associations reserve the right to plead their case prior to any disciplinary action.”
The distinctive use of wording for the appealing process, one instance being before any further disciplinary action, and for the other instance being prior to any disciplinary action, created a point of contention for both parties. RCSC received a two day deadline to submit their appeal to SUS, which the club abided by.
In their appeal, Holmes requested that the club’s privileges be reinstated given their right to appeal was denied prior to the suspension. SUS carefully considered RCSC’s request and responded by informing them their club could continue, although on a probation status, and clarified that SUS has the right to respond prior to escalated or final disciplinary outcomes in accordance to section 16.2, reading:
“16.2: Disciplinary action varies based on the severity of the act, but some penalties could include:
16.2.1: Immediate cancellation of a Club & Association Event.”
SUS also mentioned in an email sent to RCSC that while they considered the club’s appeal, the suspension was an interim measure and not a final sanction, which ultimately resulted in the suspension being dropped and probation being employed instead.
“This decision was reached after careful consideration. The actions taken allows your Club to express your interest in advocacy and student engagement, while upholding SUS’ obligation to administer our Club & Association guidelines and policies in a consistent and equitable manner.”
During the interview, Holmes expressed his concern with the manner in which his club’s situation was handled, stating that to him it feels like political repression. He acknowledged that calling for a student strike during the Campus Engagement Expo was very political in nature, but to have the club initially shut down because of the wording on a pamphlet seemed like a drastic response — recalling that they immediately crossed out the sentence on the pamphlet upon Faheem’s request.
Holmes reported feeling as though agitating the student body when campaigning for better conditions for students on campus was frowned upon and potentially placed them in a tenuous relationship with UFV.
“I feel like they shut us down as a result of us agitating for the student body [when] trying to actually secure better conditions for the students on campus. This throws us into a [possibly] tenuous relationship with UFV as a whole.”
Holmes is worried that what happened to his club could potentially be repeated with other clubs supervised by SUS, because of the power they demonstrated to enforce the guidelines where deemed applicable, reserving the right to provide a clear explanation before responding with potentially severe disciplinary action.
As of writing this article, the RCSC remains on probation and has a limited ability to table at UFV, capped at six days total throughout the remainder of the semester, along with other restrictions that significantly impact their ability to engage as a club.
Holmes mentioned that the RCSC is happy to cooperate with SUS, as they did when Faheem approached them during the expo to have the pamphlet changed, and that they always operated within the guidelines provided by SUS.
“I can understand where SUS is coming from [and that they] don’t like the wording on the pamphlet. [When Faheem] came down and explained to us, ‘Hey, this isn’t okay. Can you change it?’ We changed it. We’re happy to work with them.”
The Cascade made several attempts to reach out to the Student Union Society for comment and has not heard back at the time of writing.
