The Student Government Association Court of Appeals has until 1 a.m. Wednesday to decide whether or not to uphold the SGA Election Commission’s disqualification of four members of the McHugh-Aijaz party.
President-Elect Michael McHugh and Vice President-Elect Mohammed Aijaz, along with two of their party members, Brandon Balwant and Laxmi Ramana, were disqualified after the Commission decided they had committed election fraud by using students’ PeopleSoft numbers, birthdays and names to vote for McHugh and Aijaz without the students’ knowledge.
The hearings lasted from 8 p.m. Monday to 12:45 a.m. today and were originally held in the large conference room in the University Center Underground but were moved to the Atlantic Room to accommodate the large amount of attendees.
Balwant and Ramana were the appellants in the first hearing, which was immediately followed by one for Michael and Aijaz. All four were represented by Michael’s brother Cameron McHugh and Houston attorney and former Houston City Council Member Jolanda Jones.
Though Chief Justice Taylor Kilroy said students had to represent themselves, Jones argued with the court until the Commission allowed her to advise Cameron while he represented his brother and the other appellants.
“Actually, because I’m just worried about time… (Cameron McHugh), you may represent the (appellants), just to be sure we can get a move on,” Kilroy said.
Jones agreed to limit her involvement to whispering advice in her client’s ear, although she later stood and addressed the court directly several times, until Associate Justice Raul Lopez threatened to excuse her from the court.
“I’d really like this to remain professional, and I don’t think we’re going to have a professional hearing with her in here,” Kilroy said.
The candidates denied all charges, centering their appeal on procedural errors they said were made by the Commission. The Commission based its arguments largely on two affidavits and a testimony by James Lee, who ran for a College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences senatorial seat with the McHugh-Aijaz party.
Lee told the court he had received a phone call from Michael on the last night of the run-off elections in which Michael asked him to commit voter fraud.
“Mr. McHugh (Michael) said ‘we’re entering in PeopleSofts, are you in?’” Lee said.
Lee said he agreed and was sent seven PeopleSoft numbers from Balwant at around 11:45 p.m. He said he used two of them to place votes for Michael and Aijaz.
Lee also said he received incriminating Facebook messages from Balwant, but he deleted them because they made him feel guilty.
“I just fell into this depression — just immediately,” Lee said. “I didn’t want to see it.”
Michael denied the allegations and said Lee was making them because he was bitter over rejected romantic advances Lee allegedly made towards Michael. Lee denied making any advances towards the appellate.
“In the past, when Michael has become upset with other people, he likes to point out that these people don’t like him because they asked him out on a date,” Lee said.
Michael also said he was concerned The Daily Cougar’s Editor in Chief, Daniel Renfrow, was blackmailing Lee, as the two had previously been in a romantic relationship.
“I was afraid that Daniel was out for blood. One thing James said he did do, he said ‘stay away from Daniel, he’s going to try and get to you. But he’s out for blood, he will write anything he can about you if it means getting a good story.’”
The Cougar was brought up several times throughout the hearings. News Editor Taylor McGilvray was unexpectedly called to testify about emails forwarded by the Cougar to the Commission and whether the Cougar said there was video evidence of the fraud.
McGilvray said the Cougar did not print any articles saying that.
The only references in the Cougar to video footage in relation to the fraud were made on March 6 and March 8. On March 6 the Cougar reported that there was no camera evidence available. On March 8 the Cougar reported that Kilroy had said the committee was reviewing tapes in an attempt to identify a student who passed out petitions in front of the M.D. Anderson Memorial Library. This was not mentioned in the hearing.
The appellants contested their disqualification, saying the Commission had filed the disqualification past the deadline for complaints.
“We believe that these charges brought up against the defendants were both meritless, thoughtless and were in direct violation of the election code,” Cameron said.
The Commission said according to the election code, it did not have to file a complaint, and it has jurisdiction to investigate and deliberate allegations of election fraud.
“We followed the code as closely as we could,” said Assistant Commissioner Said Jalajal.
The appellants also said Chief Election Commissioner Arsalan Razakazi was biased against Michael.
“A lot of people believe that Michael was behind the fact that Arsalan was voted down for finance director,” said Briann Gallien, last year’s Commissioner. “(Razakazi said) the only reason (Michael) wanted to pass Good Samaritan was so he could do drugs with his friends, and the only reason he wanted GENDA passed was because he was gay… I believe that the whole process was completely messed up.”
Razakazi denied making these statements.
The Commission read affidavits written by students Alexandro Jimenez and Amber Khan, who said they were approached by students matching Balwant and Ramana’s description, who took their PeopleSoft numbers, names and birthdays for use in a petition.
Jimenez said he gave false information to the petitioners, but Khan did not, and she said when she tried to vote online, the system had already registered a vote from her.
Cameron objected to the affidavits after being advised by Jones because they were “not in the file that (the appellants) were presented originally.”
Jones later said the defense was being put on “hearing by ambush.”
“That’s why this country was founded because that’s what they did in England, and that’s what the Nazis did,” Jones said.
Kilroy said SGA bylaws do not require the court to volunteer submitted evidence to the defense, and the appellants’ case was not hurt by the inability to cross-examine the witnesses because they had already run out of time within which they could question witnesses.
The only information provided to the defense was the names of the witnesses, and Jones cited rules that the court is required to collect contact information from the witnesses, but Kilroy said the contact information was withheld because of contradictions with FERPA, a federal law.
“As I’m sure you know as well, federal law trumps whatever is in these bylaws,” he said.
Towards the end of the last hearing, Michael reiterated his denial of the allegations.
“Honestly I always viewed this as my race to win from the beginning,” he said. “It’s less likely that I would do anything illegal because having run last year, I have the name recognition, I have the experience. We had alleged voter fraud last year, so I wouldn’t be stupid enough this year to get caught. “
After the hearings ended, Lee gave a statement to the Cougar apologizing for his role in the alleged fraud.
“I just want to say that I’m sorry to all the students. I know I made a mistake,” he said. “It was never my intention to do anything of this nature, but I just got caught up in things. I really want to try to make amends, and I hope that the students can forgive me.”
Correction: In a previously published version of this article it was reported that the only time the Cougar mentioned video footage in regard to the alleged fraud was on March 6. An additional article ran in the Cougar on March 8 in which Chief Justice Taylor Kilroy said tapes were being reviewed in order to identify a student who passed out petitions in front of the M.D. Anderson Library.
I believe James Lee's courage is to be applauded. Very gutsy to come forward, given he was incriminating himself. Given his testimony puts him at risk for expulsion, one has to question whether someone would commit purjury regarding something that big, over rejection. Methinks not.
Second, the circus was only made more enjoyable with Jolanda Jones in the room. It was almost as if Cameron McHugh was her marionette, the way she whispered his lines to him. Better than television.
Thank you Court of Appeals for making an informed decision, whatever it may be.
Its funny though that he could not provide a shred of evidence towards the allegation. It seems more likely that he may have taken advantage of the situation to get back at Mchugh for not dating him
I hope your IP address is traced. 😀 I'd love to know who you are.
In all seriousness, I am more apt to believe someone who came forward to blow the whistle and risk facing serious consequences for their actions. Think about it: What does James Lee have to gain from doing all this? Not only does it cut ties with someone he said was closer than a brother, it puts him at jeopardy for university-sanctioned punishment. Being rejected is not worth being suspended or expelled.
Furthermore, he did provide evidence in that the tone of the text messages read on the stand, while not explicit, did sound like concern. Paraphrasing, but McHugh had said if he was in trouble, Jolanda could help him. Not to feel coerced if someone was lying to him. Lying to him about what? And who is this party that could get James Lee to purjure himself. That's silly, man.
And, as a long-time friend of the defendant, he said McHugh had used that line before. I don't know either party, but again, am apt to believe someone who risks punishment to tell the truth. Good for him.
Many things, he could be trying to get back with his old boyfriend or his old boyfriend put him up to this, maybe he will be nominated back into the SGA , or just to get back at Michael because he was rejected. He claims he deleted his facebook messages, but maybe the case was that they were never any facebook messages to begin with. Also the tone is that Michael is worrying that they may be blackmailing or twisting his arm with something like they did to McHugh claiming that they had video evidence when they didn't. I warned at the SGA senator canadate orientation of someone using cheating in favour of an opposing party, and Michael been warning everyone in his party that they might try to accuse him of cheating just to bring him down.
Or, your party knew the game plan and decided to create a scapegoat.
Or maybe we didn't know about this the last minute and this was set up
No, it's still the other way around. Consider your own words: "I warned at the SGA senator canadate orientation of someone using cheating in favour of an opposing party, and Michael been warning everyone in his party that they might try to accuse him of cheating just to bring him down."
Either you guys knew the plan to begin with, or you should have been the Nostradamus Party instead of McHugh-Aijaz. SMH.
Cynicism of humanity is seeing the future in many cases
By the way, worth mentioning TDC got slammed over and over by McHugh's counsel only to be vindicated by morning. There was, as Taylor McGilvray testified, no articles mentioning the availability of video. TDC 1, McHugh 0.
I have no doubt that McHugh committed fraud. I hope the university will take action against him and expel/suspend him for being an ambitious jackass.
Word.
I was in class with one of the candidates. A kid said, "A vote for McHugh-Aijaz is a vote for corruption." The candidate responded, "There's a little truth behind that." I guess there is truth behind it.
By the way, the candidate was from the McHugh-Ajiaz party.
"Chief Justice Taylor Kilroy said the Election Committee is watching tapes to identify who passed out petitions to a student in front of M.D. Anderson Memorial Library."
The Daily Cougar did report this – however it was based on a quote by the Chief Justice (who interestingly made no mention of this last night). https://thedailycougar.com/2012/03/08/sga-senate-d…
Actually, having been at that meeting, I'm pretty sure they misquoted him… If I remember, all talk of tapes was purely speculative, more like "we've been told what tapes to try to obtain, and we are attempting to get them."
I pretty sure if they obtain those tapes (if they not have already) , it would show innocence of the two senators.
Personally if I was misled and gave them my personal info and they used it to vote for me I would look into filing fraud and identity theft charges with the city and ask that these jokers be prosecuted and put through the criminal justice system. I would probably also look into filing a civil suit against them too.
Im glad to see that the judicial system works at U of H. We need to make an example of all them so that this does not happen again. I also think a re-election is in order.
This article is biased by it’s omission. Mr. Lee’s testimony was supposedly backed up by very vague text messages that could have meant almost anything. The other “evidence” presented to the election commission had patently false statements saying 1) the accused were getting petitions signed in a computer lab when the computer lab was closed and 2) one of the accused was “identified” by a phone, and this person had never owned such a phone.
This is an illegitimate trial with zero reliable evidence. As an activist who has been targeted and persecuted by UH’s administration for the causes I support and the work I’ve put towards these causes, I have to say this smells like one of those cases by all available evidence. The fact that Mr. McHugh and his party stand for causes that are not in line with with the conservative, pro-business administration’s agenda, they are being targeted in an attempt to limit their power. The university is trying to make an example of people who stick their neck out for the sake of student needs, to squelch student power.
…still a better love story than twilight?
This whole thing seems like a battle between TDC and McHugh. I'm not taking sides as to who's right or wrong, but TDC has been using some very mean, accusing, and sarcastic language towards McHugh, and from what McHugh has been quoted as saying makes him seem incompetent. Although, the quotes seem really taken out of context. I want to give a fair assessment to the situation and I feel no one has been properly represented. I feel like TDC has been behaving pretty unprofessionally about the whole thing. I know I'm biased because I'm an acquaintance of McHugh, but in the pursuit of justice, I really want to know the truth. I'm willing to put aside bias, but TDC needs to put theirs aside as well.
It's funny. The McHugh supporters point and say, "They have no proof, just baseless accusations," and then point to TDC and say, "They are anti McHugh" without any proof. Just baseless accusations.
Brandon, weren't you one to those who ran for an director's position last year, but Michael's party Coogs for Change blocked their nomination?
Incorrect. I was considered by President Harding for Director of External Affairs, but never made it to nomination proceedings because a change of CEOs at my company (and subsequent changes in my contract with the New York Times Co., for which I write) required I drop my bid as I would not be able to devote myself in that capacity. I would love to have served our university, and am sure I will eventually find a capacity in which to be helpful.
Given I have no past history with Michael McHugh and did actually vote for him in this past election, there would have been no reason to fear Coogs for Change unless I was being judged not on the merits but because of whose administration I sought to serve under.
Furthermore, if the decision of the election commission is overturned by the appeals court, I will fully support their decision and offer my congratulations to the new president and vice president, even if I believe that decision was made not on the basis of fact but on an error in procedure.
Really? you spend a lot of time saying his a fraud on the daily cougar.
I think he is guilty, yes.
According to the case against Michael, the election commission said that they were disqualifying because other party members "might" have performed fraud and that as party leader, he is guilty of association. According to you, since Acorn performed election fraud in favor of Obama, Obama should be impeached because of that
“Its because he’s in love with me”.
This article is biased by it’s omissions. There was no evidence in the case and the only things that passed for “evidence” were very vague text messages left by someone who quite probably had ulterior motives and emails, anonymous to anyone at the hearing, submitted by people who didn’t take the time to come out and make a statement. Not to mention, things used to identify the accused students, i.e. a cell phone that one of the accused was alleged to have (which it turns out he didn’t) and an accusation that students collected information from folks in a computer lab, while it was closed, which were proven false during the hearing are nowhere to be found in this coverage.
This case and the Daily Cougar coverage has been biased from the start, and I can say as an activist who has been targeted by various arms of the UH administration for the work I do and the causes I support, that is exactly what this smells like. Michael McHugh is not in the preferred model of “Yes Man” SGA president, who will basically follow the protocol and interests of the administration and business interests invested at UH, so people are working to keep him out of power. The Redvolution party puts forth mostly spineless candidates for president who worry more about their resumes than the needs of students and other marginalized groups on campus, so the Administration and the “Yes Men and Women” who share this agenda are working to keep dissidence out.
Those of us who stand up against power have to keep our noses completely clean, because we are often under a microscope and the powers at be are always looking for a reason to minimize our voices. This is part of why McHugh wouldn’t cheat: it doesn’t make sense politically.
This is not democracy. This is not student power. And this is not Journalism.
An outside attorney has no place in these student hearings, and I'm glad to read that she was threatened to be removed from the hearing for misconduct. I'm proud of the person who stood up to her.
I have ran with Michael and been through with him on the trial. People know me as a man of honor, and on my honor I know he did not performed fraud or took any part of this and that this trial was not a fair one. He was deem guilty on faulty evidence, while they violate their own codes over 20 times. By their own rules, they had no right to accuse Michael and failed to do with their own procedures. You may give me a thumbs down, all you want. However the truth is that Michael was not a part any fraud scheme, they are people who wants him and/or benefit from his downfall, that this was not a fair trial that would be uphold in proper court, and that Kamikaze was blocked by Michael's party. Brandon, if you were an successful journalist, it is sad that you spend so much time on a college election.
I don't think it's sad. I call it being informed and involved. The SGA does great things for our university. Wouldn't you agree it is important and a good thing people pay attention?
I find it interesting that they brought that woman in to this thing. To me she does not belong there and the fact they brought her in makes me question them further.
@ Brandon, I think the SGA here is a pitiable excuse who rather wants to meddle people's personal lives with trying to say how far away from the building you should be if smoking, than pasting grade replacement bills in which other universities have the same thing.
@ Mac, the Election commission hits us with a trial right after spring break, rather than informing us when the election code should be. Election Commision had violated over 20 clauses in the election code, and have shown to use underhanded techniques such as withholding evidence unless Ms. Jones forced them to follow the election code and give us a copy. When someone hits in the head with a baseball bat and tries to stab us, shouldn't we try to defend ourselves?
Passing, not pasting
unless you have taken part in anything the SGA has done, you have no room to speak on whether it a "pitable to excuse"
oh thats right you ran with micheal.. question… did you win?
I was about to say… Glad someone lost their election in the first round…
I been in SGAs at my other schools, and what I saw at SGA meetings such as the smoking ban bill and the rejection of the grade replacement bill as prime example. I did not win, but the reason I run for SGA because I want to fix a sick mess
Will you run again? 😀
This whole situation is an utter embarrassment to the entire university, including the newspaper’s involvement. This “article” reads like a gossip column, and shows profound amateurism – there is no excuse for “journalists” to make the story about themselves. Sad to see students losing their way in any shape or form.
If they find Michael guilty this will create the precedent that the court and the election commission have full discretion in deciding who will be the president. There is absolutely no physical evidence tying ANY of the accused to this crime. Nothing with video, audio, or textual proof has been presented to the court. The best evidence the prosecution has are anonymous e mails and Mr. Lee who interestingly deleted the only physical evidence tying Michael to the fraud. I hope people can see that the elections are being stolen by the election commission and the court and perhaps not intentionally. Either way, if Michael is convicted this will happen every year because any evidence no matter how ridiculous will be enough to put the candidates on trial. This is a sure way to remove power from the students because lets face it everyone has political beliefs, even the Justices. I hope people will see it this way because it's not about Michael, Parties, or if you think he did it but that everyone should be entitled to a fair trial and that no one should be convicted unless there is real evidence against them.
“The candidates denied all charges,” ??
How can Balwant and Ramana deny the charges? They were at PGH passing the petition around. Everyone that was there that afternoon is a witness. The PGH lab has a SECURITY CAMERA if anyone want’s to follow up on that.
How can they be so shameless and deny the charges!?
THANK YOU, COURT OF APPEALS!
Integrity was restored to the Student Government Association tonight. Kudos to The Daily Cougar.
what was the ruling…
Mchugh and the two senators are disqualifies, Cedric is president and Aijaz is innocent but still cant be VP cause he does not have a President so he can run again next year if he wishes.
@Brendan Laws aka Mike McQue. You are a slimey,weasely,person who has no right to democracy for trying to take away people’s rights to vote. Stealing people’s identity is a crime and should not be dismissed just because you are not a ‘Yes Man.
@At the Trial This will create no such precedent as long as whoever is elected DOES NOT COMMIT VOTER FRAUD. Michael McQue is known to have taken peoplesoft ids down in front of the UC. If a criminal can just burn evidence to get away with a crime, then why not just burn a murdered body and say you did not do it.
Actually we’re two different people. And he didn’t commit voter fraud. And there was no evidence given.
btw sorry for the misinformation. It was infront of the Satelite
How can this kid balwant have b@ll$ to deny the charges when he asked me and a friend for our PS# himself. Obviously, i didnt share that info wt him. Im glad that Lee came forward. It is a terrible thing happening wt SGA. I think that they would still win if they didn't do that but the fact that they did is just embarrassing to the integrity of the whole university.
Don't worry, Jason. They all got theirs. The Court upheld the ruling. Our president is Cedric Bandoh, VP Turner Harris. I feel sorry for Aijaz. He actually seemed like a decent guy and I am glad they made it clear he was not found guilty so he can run again next year.
Why do people care so much about SGA elections and winning? To go to the extent of having a lawyer present is beyond ridiculous!
Assuming that he wasn’t misquoted, I think its funny that he says he’d be stupid to get caught. Why not say, I’d be stupid not to follow the rules after last year, not I’d be stupid to get caught! It is almost like he’s saying, yea, I might have cheated but I learned last year not to get caught!
Having been at the trial this is incomprehensible to me. The entire trial was utterly ridiculous. Half the time the prosecution asked completely irrelevant questions, and their supposed evidence was severely lacking. The only thing even remotely incriminating was the statement from Mr. Lee who was completely unbelievable to me, looking down to the ground and mumbling the entire trial. When asked if he had any evidence for the case he answered “I had facebook messages”, keyword had, he supposedly deleted them. So it was his word against the defendants. However just from listening to the trial it was pretty clear that the verdict was already cast before the entire circus even started.
It was also odd to me that Jolanda Jones was not allowed to directly defend Mchugh, even though the bylaws state that any representative could be chosen.
Over all I found it to be an incredibly bad showing and a dark moment for UH when no proof is enough to convict on such charges.
We should just get rid of the entire election process and just have the Justices decide the President every year, that seems to be the general pattern now. It’s funny, democracy has a nice ring as long as your guy wins.
I hadn't been following this story until today, but, regardless of the facts and conclusions, bringing Jones into the hearing was a mistake.
jolanda jones? what a politician mchugh is that he's already kissed ass up that high.
too bad this will haunt him forever.
i knew he was a conniving wannabe politician the first time i met him, and i had nothing against him.
none of this surprises me.
i'm glad he got what he deserves.
😀
That is very interesting as I have met Michael Mchugh only once and felt the exact same way.