SUPRA’s International Officer Election: A Battle of Connections?

Cassandra Lau reports.

(Left to right) Yuhang Xia, Paul Whang, and Michael Li.

On July 9 afternoon, the Sydney University Postgraduate Representative Association (SUPRA) held its election for the position of International Officer outside the Courtyard Cafe in the Holme Building. 

The SUPRA notice promoting the nomination of candidates had been published on July 1, 2020, just over a week prior to election day. 

The event had less than 20 international postgraduate students present during the two nominees’ five-minute speeches. 

Today, a week later, SUPRA has announced Michael Li's successful election to the position of International Officer. 

Yuhang Xia, an Information Technology postgraduate, and Co-Vice President and International Officer of SUPRA was responsible for introducing and timing the nominees, checking student identifications, and the ballots. According to Xia, around 70 voters turned up before 14:30. 

Up to ten of the first votes were invalid as there was no instruction on the ballot requesting voters to write down their student number. Fortunately, the majority of voters turned up much later. 

Nominee Michael Li (left behind the ballot box), International Equity Officer, Xuning Feng (middle right), male voter (middle) and female voter in the queue (right).

Nominee Michael Li, 24, a Chinese second-year law postgraduate, said, “This is a good experience. There are not a lot of opportunities where you can make a speech in front of people.” 

In response to SUPRA’s election process, Li explained that the election for International Officer must be held on campus and votes must be made in person which can be problematic with social distancing rules. He said, “ Coronavirus has affected voting as not a lot of people are allowed in one place. I take the election process seriously, and I thank everyone who has engaged in the process.” 

Li especially expressed his gratitude at the beginning of his speech to all those who took time off of work and those who lived in Epping and Eastwood for commuting onto campus to vote. 

Nominee Paul Whang, 29, a Korean-American first-year sustainability postgraduate similarly agreed, “It was a nice experience because it was my first time running for a position in student government.” 

However, in response to the election process, Whang noted: “There was not a big or diverse turnout which is a bit disappointing. It would have been nice to see more nominees for the position.” He added, “It seems like SUPRA is targeted towards a specific crowd of international students. It is a shame I didn’t seem to know anybody”. 

While Whang was casting his vote, Xia had asked him whether any of his friends were coming to support him.

In response to the election, Drake Ren, a SUPRA member and voter said, “It’s a beautiful day, voting is really relaxed.” The 21-year-old Commerce postgraduate said he had turned up mainly to socialise and didn’t personally know the candidates, but proceeded to talk to Li following our conversation.

Furthermore, according to the SUPRA Electoral Regulations, the official notice must include “when the outcome of the election will be declared; and who will declare the outcome of the election.” However, neither information was available. 

The regulations also state that the “Returning Officer shall issue the declaration of election results no later than forty-eight (48) hours after the close of a ballot or polling” but upon asking Xia when results would be announced, he said, “next week”. Also, upon asking for the turnout and results, Xia referred me to the SUPRA website but no information concerning the turnout can be found. 

In addition, the notice did not provide crucial information informing nominees of their allocated time of speech, or their entitlement to a Scrutineer present through the counting of votes. Therefore, there has been no third-party to scrutinise SUPRA’s electoral procedures except from student media. 

The election last week appeared to involve some overly relaxed electoral practices. In the picture below, nominee Li stands next to voters and the ballot box. Li expressed concern that the pictures might cause people to question the legitimacy of the election process.

Though both nominees were equally qualified and suitable for the position, it was apparent that the result would be determined by who has greater connections.