Sever ties debate moonlit by allegations

Feds played host to a debate between two opposing committees in the Student Life Centre to discuss if UW should impose an academic boycott against five institutions in Israel Jan. 21. The Vote Yes and the Vote No committees each made their case over whether the student community should vote in support of the movement. 

Students will vote from Jan. 25 to Jan. 27 in a referendum.

The sever ties referendum was initiated by Ethical Collaboration in October 2015 when over 4,000 people signed a petition to carry out an academic boycott in support of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement. 

Mishkaat Kirmani, a panel member from the Yes committee, believes that the Yes committee had a strong performance.

“We were confident. A lot of the feedback we got was that a lot of myths were dispelled. A lot of people felt more comfortable talking about the issue on campus,” Kirmani said.

Kirmani also had positive things to say about the No committee’s performance.

“They did bring up some good points. They were very eloquent in the way they spoke. They were also a very good and strong team. I have nothing but good words,” she said.

The No committee alleged that the Yes committee violated Feds rules by posting on the Ethical Collaboration Facebook page prior to the campaigning period. This came following the selection of the opposing committees in the referendum. As a result, the Yes committee was deducted four demerit points leading into the debate.

Jana Omar, another member of the Yes committee, said that the allegation was simply a technicality.

“It was a mistake on our part, but it wasn’t like an allegation where we actually did something wrong or that sabotaged or delegitimizes our campaign in any way,” she said. “It was just a technicality and a formality in the Feds rules.”

“It was resolved,” Kirmani said. “Feds itself wasn’t clear about what they wanted.”


<em>This article has been edited to remove statements from the No committee attributed to its chair Kinsey Schurm. The No committee did not want to respond to Imprint&#39;s questions with attributed statements.</em>


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.