The full results of last week’s Students’ Union (SU) elections have still not been announced due to outstanding appeals of decisions relating to breaches of election rules.
This year’s elections have seen an unprecedented number of infringements, resulting in the disqualification of postgraduate presidential candidate Roman Shainskyi and a brief campaigning ban for his competitor Jeeves Rohilla.
The results of the elections for undergraduate president, university councillor, and the three vice-presidents were announced last Thursday (26/02). However, the identity of the next postgraduate president remains unknown, with the SU saying it is “working to resolve this as swiftly as possible”.
The Deputy Returning Officer (DRO) made the decision to disqualify Shainskyi last Thursday (26/02) after receiving multiple complaints against him. The candidate then appealed the ruling, which was upheld by the Returning Officer (RO) on Sunday (01/03).
Shainskyi is accused of voting on another student’s phone in the Engineering Library, interfering with the election platform on a student’s device at Trinity College, but being blocked by two-factor authentication, as well as of selecting himself for a third student and then waiting for them to confirm before leaving.
The candidate strongly denies voting for other students, telling Varsity: “Where students asked for assistance navigating the SU website – particularly locating the postgraduate category – I showed them how to access the correct page. Once they began reading manifestos and making their decision, I stepped away. Helping someone locate the correct page is not equivalent to influencing or casting their vote.”
However, the SU explained that providing voters with technical assistance also breaches their rules. They further noted that Shainskyi has been reported for engaging in “an aggressive campaigning style where he would not leave students alone until he saw them voting for him,” and attempting to form a slate with another candidate, who refused to join him.
According to the SU, these incidents alone would have been enough to disqualify Shainskyi, but were made worse by the fact that he had already been given a “formal and final warning” on Tuesday (24/02) for other breaches of election rules.
These included displaying posters in a college bar without permission, being disrespectful towards SU staff at a mobile polling station, and campaigning while less than three metres away from a student casting their vote. Shainskyi was also reported for using materials displaying the SU logo – though the DRO conceded that this last breach was unlikely to imply an endorsement.
For these infringements, the candidate received a 24-hour campaigning ban, which was reduced to 12 hours on appeal after Shainskyi claimed to have received permission from an unknown college staff member to display the posters, and to not have been disrespectful. However, the RO affirmed that the posters had breached college policy, and that SU staff had felt disrespected.
In blocking Shainskyi’s most recent appeal, the RO added that another complaint had been made against the candidate since his initial disqualification, for which there was photographic evidence. This complainant requested that their vote be reset as they had felt pressure to vote for Shainskyi.
The RO also noted that Shainskyi has accused other students of attempting to “disrupt and interfere with the candidate’s campaigning activities”. The SU said that because these complaints are not against other candidates, they must be dealt with under a different procedure.
Shainskyi told Varsity: “During hustings and throughout campaigning, I made clear that if elected, I would not prioritise political activism within the Student Union, regardless of the cause. Following that position, I experienced repeated disruption from pro-Palestine activists who strongly disagreed with my stance.
“I was followed between campaign locations, interrupted while speaking to students, and had individuals shout “Free Palestine” during conversations. Several students later informed me that they were approached and encouraged to submit complaints against me. I have witnesses prepared to confirm both the disruptions and these subsequent approaches.”
Shainskyi, an MPhil student at Judge Business School, centred his programme on encouraging startups and expanding cryptocurrency and AI opportunities for students. At a hustings last Friday (20/02), he promised to end the SU’s “propaganda about certain sides of politics”.
The candidate explained that he was pursuing a further appeal because “I believe the complaints do not accurately reflect what occurred and that the broader political context has not been fully weighed”.
In response, the DRO told Varsity: “In reviewing complaints, I have followed due process, considering evidence and first-hand accounts from multiple parties including the candidate concerned, and this consideration is addressed in my rulings. All rulings are available on the SU website, which address the rationale of decisions made. As the independent arbiters of this election, the Returning Officer and I are committed to reviewing and improving Cambridge SU’s democratic processes.”
Another postgraduate presidential candidate, Jeeves Rohilla, received a 1.5-hour campaigning ban for appearing in a collaborative Instagram post with the University’s official account.
Rohilla, a PhD student in theology and the current president of Lucy Cavendish MCR, ran on a platform of reducing college wealth inequality and improving affordability for students. He is best known for his social media interviews with fellow students, some of which are made in collaboration with the University.
Last Thursday (26/02), his latest video appeared on the Cambridge Instagram page, which has 1.5m followers, which the SU said gave him an “unfair advantage”.
The DRO recognised that Rohilla must have actively accepted the collaboration, but that the breach was still likely inadvertent. As the candidate removed the collaboration within two hours, and immediately notified the Elections Team, he was not disqualified, despite another candidate appealing to have him removed from the race.
Responding to the appeal, the RO said they “understand the strength of feeling of other candidates” but that they had confirmed with the University that Rohilla was not anticipating the post. The candidate told Varsity: “The video made no mention of the SU elections. I had no idea it was being posted, as this was done on the University of Cambridge account, and it was filmed months ago.”
Another complaint was submitted last Wednesday (25/02) after Cambridge for Palestine (C4P), which is not a registered society, published a list of endorsements on Instagram. The SU ruled that no candidates had breached election rules as they had not sought out this external endorsement.
While acknowledging that it could not “compel an external organisation to take or to not take action,” the SU noted that a request had been made for C4P to remove the post. Despite this, the endorsements remain online.
Finally, an Union of Clare Students (UCS) officer breached election rules by emailing all college students with “a list of candidates with explicitly pro-divestment manifestos” alongside a reminder to vote. The officer also personally endorsed Melanie Benedict for undergraduate president.
While the recommendations were made in a personal capacity, the email was signed with the officer’s role in the UCS. The DRO told Varsity that SU rules “do not allow the use of email lists, except following a democratic endorsement by a registered society, club or sports club”.
