After hearing arguments Sunday, the Union Judiciary (UJ) ruled at 2:25 a.m. this morning that students studying abroad do not have the right to vote in Union elections. As a result of the decision, the contested certification of round one elections now appears to be final, ending a series of election snags before the start of the second round elections. Current Union President Ben Brandzel '03 filed a UJ case against the Election Commissioners last Tuesday on behalf of David Singer '05, a student studying in Israel, claiming that Singer attempted to vote using the online voting system but was unjustly blocked.

After learning of the UJ decision, Brandzel said he was disappointed. "The logic is absurd. The result is equally absurd," he said. "Results were certified that reflected a process in which 171 voters were disenfranchised."

The Singer legal team, composed of Brandzel, Sam Dewey '06, and Lauree Hayden '03, argued that students studying abroad are still members of the Student Union and are entitled to vote.

In its decision, the UJ threw out this claim, writing that Singer's team, in its arguments, "asserts that students who study abroad are considered 'Brandeis Undergraduates' and that the preamble (to the Union Charter) therefore implies their membership in the Union. The Union Judiciary rejects this interpretation."

Singer, who has been studying in Be'er Sheva, Israel since the fall, is an Alpha Epsilon Pi fraternity brother of Union Advocate Josh Sugarman '05, who lost his bid for president by one vote. The Justice was unable to reach Singer for comment.

"David (Singer) is a friend of mine and was a supporter in this particular election," Sugarman said. Sugarman described himself as an "interested party" in the proceedings that could have potentially changed the outcome of the election in his favor. He was in attendance at the UJ hearing, as was Union President-elect Joshua Brandfon '05.

A friend of Singer, who refused to give her name, described the relationship between Singer and Sugarman as being "close." She also told the Justice that Singer expressed concern to her prior to the election that he may be unable to vote from abroad. "David mentioned it to me in passing that he was angry that he wasn't able to vote," she said.

Brandzel said he is aware of the relationship between Singer and Sugarman and that Singer's motivations were "irrelevant."

"This case brings to light a series of deep constitutional issues," Brandzel said. "To deny disenfranchised students their right because David Singer had a political preference is ridiculous."

Sugarman, who lost a Union election by the narrowest margin in recent memory, said he was "saddened" after hearing the decision. "I was disappointed when I heard the decision," he said. "They had the opportunity to recognize the legitimate votes of over 170 students. I now hope that these students will be enfranchised into the Union, but through a formal channel."

Before the case was heard, Chief Justice Cecil Thomas '03 acknowledged that the UJ was bound by a five-day deadline set in the Union Charter - any decision to rerun an election must be determined within five days of certification by the Union secretary.

Election Commissioners Aziz Nekoukar and Gregg Leppo, in a letter to the Justice, wrote, that the case "was brought (before the UJ) with the partial intent of re-running Round One elections. As a result, the Union Judiciary is caught in the middle of an electoral tug-of-war."

"Though some questions have arisen, the integrity of the process has not been undermined," the commissioners wrote. "The student body should remain confident that the system works and that there are safety measures in place to guarantee this."

Former Union Secretary Ana Yoselin Bugallo '03, who resigned Sunday citing displeasure with election bedlam, certified the elections on March 27, but approximately one hour prior to the hearing, Singer's counselors filed a motion to rerun round-one elections despite the deadline prohibiting it in the Union Charter.

In their brief, the Singer team claimed that the five-day rule didn't apply to them, saying that the issue at hand is not a dispute over election results but the clarification of voter rights.

"We are predominantly concerned about the future," Brandzel said. "The issue is one of voter enfranchisement."

Students on both sides of the UJ case seem to agree that the constitution is unclear about the right of study-abroad students to vote and that they should be afforded that right. "I absolutely believe that students studying abroad should vote," said Jonathan Sclarsic '03, who represented the election commissioners. "I do hope that in the near future there is room for legislative action that will better define union membership in the constitution so as to allow students abroad voting rights."

Computer Network Administrator Rich Graves said that it is possible for students to vote online from computers abroad. "If the decision from the student government is made, we will find a way to make it happen," he said

In addition, Graves confirmed that students abroad have never been able to vote online. "As far as we know, everyone who thinks they voted last year is mistaken," he said.

While Sclarsic said he thought the case was "very difficult" to decide, representatives for Singer took issue with the two-page unanimous decision. "This was clearly a ruling made on the basis of what the judges thought the law ought to be and not what the law stated," Dewey, co-counsel for Singer, said

Brandzel said he plans on taking no further legal action. Sclarsic said he hopes to aid in the drafting of an amendment to clarify the issue for further elections.