Indelicate Delegacy

The University College Hospital Students Association is an umbrella body made of 8 student associations (UIMSA, UADS, NANSNM, APONS, NASHIM, NIMELSSA, APS, ATS). The USA elections were held on Friday, the 13th of December. The elections run by a delegate system where a certain quota is given to each member body. The quotas are then divided in-association on the prerogative of the executives of the daughter associations.

In UADS, both in this tenure and the last, the distribution was under the purview of the General Secretary. Last year, the delegates were gotten by simply throwing it open. The general secretary at the time would put up a message on the UADS general group asking anyone interested to reach out to her. The recent elections though, took a bit of a deviant curve from this. This swerve, especially in the relative anonymity of the delegates, began the investigation detailed below.

The quota for UADS this year was 15 delegates. There are currently three classes on the clinical side. The way the delegates were chosen this year was to have all clinical executives take a spot by default. The executive roles held by clinical students are president, vice president, CODEH chairperson, sport secretary, treasurer, public relations officer and general secretary. That left 8 spaces which were assigned: 2 for the 2k25 class, 3 for the 2k24 class and 3 for the 2k23 class. The allocation for the 2k25 class seems to have been fluid by a miscommunication. The general secretary would tell the class that there were 3 spots available. Later on, the majority leader of the 2k25 class would tell the press that there were only 2 spots. When asked about this, the general secretary said the aim was to keep the number of delegates equal across all classes. So considering that the 2k25 class had 3 executives, they got 2 more slots for non-executive class members. That way, each class would end up with five spots each. (3 excos plus two interested parties in 2k25. For 2k24 and 2k23, it would be 2 excos, plus 3 class members each).

As to the eventual arrival at an 8-5-2 division where the 2k25 class had only 2 delegates while the 2k23 class had 8, the lines loop a little stranger here. The general secretary would explain that she did not vote, because she was indisposed. She would eventually reach out to a 2k23 class member to be a delegate instead. In her words, "I also got one more delegate from the 2k23 class, as I took ill and felt I would not be able to follow the manifesto night, and make an informed decision." After this, the 2k25 class would not present any delegates. The only person who indicated any interest would eventually fail to follow up on the entire affair with the 2k25 majority leader. As to the reasons for this seeming nonchalance of the 2k25 class, that remains a matter for some other time.

As at Thursday, the eleventh of last month, the general secretary would announce on her class group that no one had indicated interest and the quota for their class would go to the 2k23 class. She also stated that anyone still interested could reach out to her before 1pm that day. On the topic of why the spots went unilaterally to the 2k23 class, the general secretary said the 2k23 majority leader was available while the 2k24 rep was not. As such, considering the limited time available, the spots simply went to the 2k23 class. The 2k24 ML though, Fadipe Charles, stated that the general secretary never reached out to him. The information gap here remains unexplained.

This article may seem to be pointlessly inflammatory, but it really is not. As earlier mentioned, the USA is the body recognized as an umbrella for all clinical student associations. It is odd that the election system is a delegate based system. Be that as it may, the delegate selection process being so covert is unseemly. If we will never get to vote for ourselves, it is not a strange courtesy to at least be allowed to know who votes for us, and how they were selected. As things stand, the USA SRC has no requirements for those who will be delegates, meaning anyone at all is fit. To evade this freedom we are given (shortchanged as it may be by the delegate system) is appalling. Future selections of delegates for matters affecting members of the association individually may be better handled without all the clandestine movements with which this was handled.

The aim here, again, is not to paint any pictures of foul play anywhere. Any proof of such a thing would be very pointless considering the elections are over. The aim is instead to advise that future occurrences of anything like this be a bit more aboveboard. The rumors circulating regarding power plays around certain candidates and the roles of the UADS executives in them are particularly repulsive. As such, in matters of student representation, matters such as this, should be handled better. UADS saw similar occurrences earlier in the tenure regarding the Echelon-gate scandal. A word they say, remains enough for those who possess wisdom.

Dentatics Press