Day Two of Appeal Board Hearing Reveals More Shocking Details

By Isaac White

The second day of the Akwesasne Election Appeal Board hearings continued to reveal significant procedural flaws and widespread community frustration following the recent general election. The ongoing controversy has highlighted issues such as inaccuracies in the voter list, inadequate public notices, procedural inconsistencies, and mishandling of the electoral process.

Community members have voiced their outrage, calling for accountability and a new election to ensure fairness and transparency. The second day's hearings focused on Theresa Thompson, the Chief Electoral Officer, and the various failures under her watch that have contributed to the turmoil.

The hearings highlighted several critical issues plaguing the recent election. Chief among these were significant inaccuracies in the voter list, which led to many community members being disenfranchised. Some of the critical issues raised by community members who testified before the Appeal Board include the following: Public notices were inadequately disseminated, and there was an over-reliance on social media that failed to reach many in the community. Procedural inconsistencies further undermined the election's integrity. These problems have collectively fueled community unrest and demands for a new, fair election.

The Chief Electoral Officer, Theresa Thompson, faced significant scrutiny for her role in the election's mishandling. A major issue was the lack of necessary documents and files, which she partly attributed to technical problems. She explained that despite multiple requests, she did not receive all the required files from her predecessor, complicating her ability to manage the voter list accurately.

Thompson claimed these issues led to widespread inaccuracies in the voter list, including outdated information and missing names. Thompson acknowledged receiving numerous complaints about the voter list being wrong and not current, significantly contributing to voter disenfranchisement.

Thompson also highlighted the need for the CEO role to be a full-time position due to its complexities and the insufficient support from Executive Services. She mentioned that the CEO was not provided with adequate direction or guidance, which she insisted hindered her effectiveness.

Additionally, Thompson testified about the challenges in finding enough workers for the election, attributing the difficulty to community members being rude and mean to those volunteering for these positions. This lack of support and resources, according to Thompson, exacerbated the procedural issues experienced during the election.

One more critical failure was Thompson's non-compliance with the timing requirements for submitting documents according to the election law. She admitted to missing the forty-eight-hour deadline to submit required documents to the specified recipients as mandated per the Akwesasne Election Law. This failure to adhere to the prescribed timelines was yet another catastrophe for the integrity of the election.

Non-compliance with the election law regarding the provision of a revised eligible voter list to the candidates was also revealed during Thompson’s testimony. According to Section 6 of the Akwesasne Election Law, the CEO must prepare a revised eligible voter list and make it available to all candidates. This crucial step ensures that candidates can verify the eligibility of voters and assist in adding eligible community members to the list.

In her own words during testimony, Thompson told the board she failed to provide this revised list to the candidates, an issue that some community members believe contributed to the numerous instances of individuals being turned away at the polls. Without access to the updated voter list, candidates could not identify and ensure all eligible voters were included correctly. This breakdown is a direct violation of the law and can be seen as having likely resulted in voter disenfranchisement.

The testimony revealed significant inconsistencies in voter eligibility handling, raising concerns about preferential treatment. A key example involved a community member who rectified the situation by calling the Chief Electoral Officer upon discovering her name was not on the eligible voter list. She testified that she completed the necessary forms and was promptly added to the list.

According to Section 6.6 of the Akwesasne Election Law, the required forms (Schedule “G” and Schedule “H”) must be submitted to the C.E.O. to add a name to the voter's list. In this case, there is no evidence from the testimonies that these forms were physically handed in, as the issue was resolved over the phone.

This process deviates from the stipulated procedure, and this swift resolution contrasts sharply with the experiences of many other community members who, despite following the procedures outlined in the Akwesasne Election Law, were denied the right to vote.

The inconsistency in applying these procedures suggests yet another lack of uniform adherence to the law, which undermines the integrity of the election. Many other voters who followed the required procedures were turned away, exacerbating feelings of disenfranchisement and unfair treatment.

Over the two-day hearings, community members expressed frustration with the lack of adequate public notices during the hearings. They emphasized the over-reliance on social media for disseminating important election information. This failure in communication was highlighted as a critical issue that contributed to voter disenfranchisement and a lack of transparency in the election process.

During the second day of hearings, a community member specifically mentioned the vital role of the Indian Time newspaper in ensuring that all members of Akwesasne are kept informed. They lamented the newspaper's reduced publication frequency, describing it as a loss for the community. The newspaper has historically been a trusted source for disseminating crucial information.

The testimony underscored the absence of Indian Time's regular publishing created an information gap. Without the newspaper, many community members missed critical updates and notices that would have informed them about voter registration, nomination processes, and other critical electoral procedures.

Community members called for the use of traditional methods of communication to ensure that all residents are adequately informed. This sentiment reflects a broader demand for transparency, fairness, and accessibility in the electoral process.

The Akwesasne Election Appeal Board is mandated by Section 14.7 of the Akwesasne Election Law to provide their decision within fourteen days of submission. Some in the community have expressed significant dissatisfaction with the board's stance on their authority. A board alternate emphasized that their role was primarily to make recommendations.

However, Section 14.6 of the law states that the Appeal Board has the authority to set aside the election results if a corrupt practice or a violation of the Akwesasne Election Law likely affected them. Setting aside the results would invalidate the current election outcomes, logically necessitating a new election to ensure fairness and transparency.

The law outlines that any decision by the Appeal Board must be by majority vote. If the originating appellant is dissatisfied with the decision, they may appeal in writing to the Akwesasne Mohawk Court within five days of receiving the notice. The decision of the Akwesasne Mohawk Court is final.

Given the significant issues raised during the hearings, the community's call for a new election is unsurprising. By setting aside the election results, the Appeal Board can effectively force a new election, fulfilling the community's demands. Addressing the law's procedural gaps is essential to restoring trust in the electoral process. Many in Akwesasne are urging decisive action to facilitate true working democracy, as voting is a foundational aspect of a free society.