The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Board of Directors (BoD) met on March 11. The discussion was dominated by clause 14.4 of the recently signed Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) between the McGill administration and SSMU.

The meeting began with a presentation from Bounce, a platform that centralizes clubs, services, and events for student unions. SSMU President Dymetri Taylor expressed interest in the platform but noted that further internal discussion was necessary before any decisions could be made.

The meeting then moved to discussing clause 14.4 of the MoA, which prevents any student with a disciplinary record, a history of suspension, or who is found responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures from being a SSMU Officer or Director.      

During the meeting’s question period, Taylor explained that while the student union opposed the wording in clause 14.4, they ultimately accepted the terms of the agreement under pressure from time constraints.

“We were on a strict deadline: If the MoA was not signed by [Feb. 28], then the MoA would be null and void, meaning that all clubs and services of the SSMU would no longer be able to use the McGill name,” Taylor said.

Director Fawaz Halloum asked if a legal review of clause 14.4 would be possible. Taylor asserted that on the week of signing the agreement, SSMU consulted their legal team, who concluded that there were no issues with the clause. Taylor noted, however, that SSMU is looking to amend this clause in the upcoming summer. For this to occur, the Board would need to put forward a motion to approve reopening the MoA. 

The meeting then turned to motions approved at the Legislative Council meeting on Feb. 18. Among others, this included the ratification of the motion regarding the Policy on Black Student Enhancement and Inclusion, moved by Vice-President (VP) External Hugo-Victor Solomon.

In the discussion period that followed, VP University Affairs Abe Berglas spoke on McGill bringing disciplinary action against them for distributing pamphlets before the lecture of Professor Douglas Farrow, detailing his published works they deemed transphobic and homophobic. 

“I am going to guess that the university is very interested in symbolically showing that this is an offence, because they are trying to lower the bar of what they consider a disruption in classes as they are sick of protestors and they want to be seen as cutting down on their protest culture,” Berglas said.

Under clause 14.4 of the MoA, if Berglas is found guilty, McGill may remove them from their position as a SSMU Officer. Executive terms end on May 31. Halloum commented on the threat he believes this clause poses to SSMU’s sovereignty and urged the Board to take a stronger stance against the clause.

“When McGill dictated these criteria, it rendered activists, especially targeted activists, inadmissible to places of power in their union where they can actually change things,” Halloum said. “It’s alarming to let a dominating power dictate who can run in your politics based on their own criteria, and their own criteria is not objective.” 

Solomon and Taylor responded by saying that these issues had already been discussed in previous confidential sessions.

Halloum then put forward an auxiliary motion to seek and declassify a written legal opinion on clause 14.4 of the MoA, concerned that SSMU is at risk of a civil lawsuit due to discrimination against a particular group of students. However, after a rerun of the vote, with only Halloum and Director Hamza Abu Alkhair voting in favour, five voting against, and the rest abstaining, the motion failed to be added to the meeting agenda. Taylor noted that the Board can turn to their internal council for legal advice who is already familiar with the details of the MoA, and will not cost the student body an additional fee.

Sound bite:

“It’s a hassle and a half [for McGill] to even do that, it’s redundant to do that, and the year is almost over. [McGill] can suck it up and deal with it. That’s the best way to put it.” — Taylor on Berglas’ potential removal from their position.

Moment of the meeting:

Upon first putting forward the auxiliary motion on clause 14.4, no director seconded Halloum’s vote in favour of the motion. VP Internal Zeena Zahida asked the Speaker to run the vote again.