Upholding due process: Student Supreme Court set good precedent

The Student Supreme Court made a wise decision when it ruled last week that the Board of Elections violated a student's right to due process.

The court's ruling came after the board levied a $40 fine on student body president candidate Matt Wohlford for holding a meeting in an on-campus building and speaking with The Daily Tar Heel.

(Candidate Ashley Klein was also fined for these infractions but her defense was different than Wohlford's. Klein's fine was reduced after she petitioned the Supreme Court.)

The elections board interpreted these meetings as open campaigning. Such campaigning is illegal until a candidate is officially certified. At the time Wohlford had not been certified.

The Student Code clearly states that any defendant has the right to defend himself before fines might be imposed.

The opportunity to present a defense is a foundation to our county's legal system which the Student Code also espouses.

The board fined Wohlford without allowing him to present a defense. Board Chairman Ryan Morgan ended the investigation immediately after Wohlford confirmed he held meetings on campus.

But the Student Code is very explicit about the investigation process. It says that the chairman should present initial investigative findings to the board in a meeting run by the vice chairman.

At the time of Morgan's lone investigation a vice chairman and other members had not even been selected.

Morgan should have waited until the board was convened instead of independently ending his investigation.

Later when the assembled board met to determine the extent of the fine it did so in secret. Wohlford was not invited nor was he aware that the meeting was even occurring.

Clearly this exclusion violated his right to due process.

In its decision the Supreme Court not only restored justice but also created a clear precedence for future boards to follow.