A motion from several Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA) executives and councillors to end the court order requiring them to recognize the status of 16 councillors was rejected in court Sept. 29.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Colin McKinnon ruled the previous injunction, forbidding council seats from being considered vacant, to remain in effect “until trial of the dispute,” according to McKinnon’s endorsement.

In his endorsement, McKinnon described CUSA vice-president (internal) Ariel Norman’s decision to “unilaterally” unseat the 16 councillors as “draconian and affected without due process.”

“The declaration put the cart before the horse and completely trumped the democratic will of the  Carleton University electorate in the process,” McKinnon added.

On July 28, citing CUSA bylaw 1, section 2.5, Norman sent an email to 16 councillors stating their seats had become vacant because they failed to attend or send a proxy to the July 18 and July 26 council meetings. The councillors maintain these meetings were not valid.

Norman said although it’s clear from McKinnon’s ruling that he considers the bylaw in question too strict, it’s her job to uphold the association’s bylaws.

“When the plaintiffs chose not to attend council meetings and hold up the business of CUSA, I was left with no other choice but to uphold the bylaws and inform them that, in accordance with the rules, their seats were considered vacant,” Norman said.

Plaintiff and public affairs councillor Michael De Luca said McKinnon’s ruling makes it clear Norman didn’t have the authority to unseat the 16 councillors and didn’t use the proper process for vacating seats.

“Because of her actions, the plaintiffs were forced to seek the only recourse available at the time to uphold their democratically elected seats, which was in the Ontario Superior Court,” De Luca said.

In his endorsement, McKinnon said there’s not enough evidence to rule on the validity of the two meetings.

“Based on the material before me, it can only be said that this is a serious issue to be tried,” he concluded.

The next step is either to take the dispute to trial or an out-of-court agreement, De Luca said.

“We’re willing to come to an agreement if they are willing,” he said.

“If that doesn’t happen it’s going to be dragged out in court because they can’t come to the bargaining table.”

Norman said she needs to meet with the other defendants before commenting on what the next step might be.