Imphal, April 21 2009: Even as the controversy over the election of the president and Councillors of Manipur University Students' Union continues to rage on, the Election Committee for the year 2009-10 has stated that it did not indulge in favouritism or foul play in any manner.

In a statement issued to the press, the Election Committee said that the members were chosen by the outgoing president of MUSU on April 13 and the Committee did not want to prolong the election process given the fact that the students of MU could not give due attention to their studies in the light of the uncertain situation in the State as well as the Lok Sabha election.

The decision to hold the election fast was not taken without reason, it said and added that there have been instances in the past when election to MUSU was held within seven days of constituting the Election Committee.

It was stipulated that the original certificates of Class X and Class XII should be submitted along with the nomination paper so that MU does not suffer another case of ignominy, it added.

If the election notification and nomination form issued by the Election Committee had reasons to cause inconveniences to the students, candidates and those at A Block, then written complaints should be submitted to the Committee, noted the statement.

The election notification as well as the nomination form were issued openly at the Student Home building said the Committee and added that the same was publicised in the print and electronic media.

No formal complaints were ever received from the students, aspiring candidates and from A Block with regard to the election process taken up by the Election Committee.

Since there was no formal complaint it was decided to stick to the earlier announcement of April 18 as the last date to submit nomination forms as well as to avail them.

Till April 18, nomination forms for Councillor were received from 26 aspiring candidates from 25 Departments including one research.

There were cases when two nomination forms were submitted from a single Department.

For the post of president Ph Ibosana submitted three nomination papers, it added.

As per the schedule announced earlier, scrutiny was held on April 20, said the Election Committee and added that while the scrutiny process was on some tussle broke out among the students, which prompted the RO, Prof RK Hemakumar to resign as the RO.

Following the new development, the Assistant Registrar Y Rasini Devi immediately issued an order appointing Dr Aheibam Koireng of the Centre for Manipur Studies as the RO, maintained the Election Committee.

The scrutiny process then was held and the nomination forms of 22 candidates including president aspirant Ph Ibosana were found to be in order.

The nomination forms of five aspiring Councillors from four Departments were rejected as they were not present at the time of scrutiny.

The Councillors from the four Departments are to be nominated in consultation with the elected members of MUSU later, it contended.

Accordingly 22 including Ph Ibosana were declared elected uncontested, asserted the Election Committee.

Compared to elections in the past, the MUSU election this year was fairly conducted, said the Committee and added that commotion over issuance of ID card during election time, stand offs during scrutiny process, holding the election soon after constituting the Election Committee, absence of proposer, seconder and candidate, lack of required documents have all been associated with election to MUSU in the past.

Nominating a representative from a Department after the election as no one had filed the nomination forms is also a trend in MU.

Stating that the Lyngdoh Commission, which is the back bone of election to student bodies was scripted on an all India basis, the Election Committee said that main emphasis is laid on some main points while local adjustments are resorted to on other points.

The main emphasis laid down by the Lyngdoh Commission include fixing the upper age limit at 23, 25 and 28 respectively for college, university and research candidates, disallowing a successful candidate from contesting twice, no failed student to be allowed to contest the election, making 75 pc attendance record mandatory for any student seeking to contest the election.

The most vexing issue concerning the MUSU election this time was the clause on no allowing a failed student to contest in the election as there is always the question of whether students whose results are yet to be declared can contest the election.

On this the Election Committee dwelt on certain points.

The life span of the Election Committee is only a month, said the statement and added there is no guarantee that the result of any Department would be declared within one month.

As such the Election Committee has nothing to do with the question of whether the examination results would be declared within one month or not.

Again not all Department do not announce their result within the one month time frame.

On the basis of the non-declaration of examination result, the Election Committee did not deny anyone their desire to contest the election.

The question of whether the candidate will be allowed to continue in office after the declaration of the exam rests on whether he or she is successful or not, said the statement.

In case the elected candidate fails to clear the examination then the Lyngdoh Commission will come into force, it said and added that in case a Department fails to send any Councillor, due to non declaration of examination results, then the post will remain vacant until it is filled up by a candidate from the same Department.

There is no clause which says that the vacant post be filled up by a student from a different Department, it added.

All this show that the Election Committee did not wilfully try to rob a candidate or a Department from contesting the election.

According to the Lyngdoh Commission only bonafide students can contest the election, said the Election Committee.

The last date of submitting nomination forms was April 18 at 4 pm, said the Election Committee and added that at 3.57 pm of April 18, three candidates approached the Election office to submit their nominations with the prayer that they be allowed to submit their papers along with the provisional certificates of Class 12 .

Thereafter the Election Committee, after minutely discussing their case decided that the Class provisional certificate will be treated as valid and an order to this effect was issued, said the statement.

There was no wilful agenda on the part of the Election Committee to favour one candidate against the other.

Moreover none of the three candidates had submitted any formal complaints, it added.

Comment