Faculty of Arts representative Edom Girma faces allegations of pre-campaigning, misrepresentation and violating elections policy
By Vama Saini and Nazeefa Ahmed, March 3 2025—
The University of Calgary Students’ Union (SU) General Election has sparked tensions within the Faculty of Arts after an email sent by Faculty of Arts representative Edom Girma led to accusations of misrepresentation, pre-campaigning and improper use of student emails, the latter which goes against the SU Elections policy.
However, the SU has not confirmed whether the policy was violated.
The situation escalated during a Students’ Legislative Council (SLC) meeting on Feb. 11, where fellow representatives confronted Girma over the email’s content and potential policy violations.
In a statement to the Gauntlet, the Chief Returning Officer (CRO) confirmed that an investigation is underway.
“The Elections team is aware of the allegations surrounding one of the candidates in a faculty representative race. We are currently investigating this matter. As this is an ongoing investigation with current candidates, it would be inappropriate to comment on it further at this time. As per standard election protocol, a summary of all complaints received and sanctions issued — if any — will be provided in the CRO’s post-election report at the end of the 2025 General Election,” read the statement.
The email sent by Girma
On Feb. 4, Girma sent an email to Faculty of Arts students, announcing his intent to seek re-election and encouraging nominations for a second term. However, the message shifted from a campaign pitch to criticism of his fellow representatives.
“Some of you might ask, ‘Why didn’t you do all of this already during your current term?’ Trust me, I’ve been asking myself the same thing,” Girma wrote. “But let me be real with you — one of the major challenges has been the lack of commitment from the other arts representatives,” stated the email sent by Councillor Girma to an undisclosed number of recipients.
Girma claimed that his efforts to serve students were hindered by uncooperative peers and SU bureaucracy.
“One of the first things we should’ve done was introduce ourselves to students through class talks at the start of the year. But guess what? One of my fellow reps thought this was a ‘waste of time’ because we had already introduced ourselves at an orientation session—with about 200 students (out of thousands),” wrote Girma.
He highlighted his achievements, such as organizing the “Sweet Success” event, proposing napping pods and advocating for free printing — portraying them as accomplishments made despite internal resistance.
“Getting things done often felt like pulling teeth, with unnecessary delays and resistance at every turn … despite all of that, I pushed through — because when I commit to something, I see it through, even without their support,” read the email.
Girma also criticized the SU’s communication strategies and branding, arguing that they were outdated and ineffective.
“We need a new vision to push forward, to create a Students’ Union that is actually relevant, engaging and effective in today’s world,” continued the email.
Confrontation at SLC
The email didn’t go unnoticed. At an SLC meeting on Feb. 11, the other three Faculty of Arts representatives — Simchah Atanda, Aitazaz Shah and Martin Al-Najar — challenged Girma’s claims, arguing that the email misrepresented their work and fractured the team dynamic.
Councillor Atanda opened the discussion during the question period by addressing the complaints they’d received from students about the contents of Girma’s email.
“Unfortunately, this email even went out beyond faculty of arts [students] who are the only people eligible to nominate the councillor. He went to students in the faculty of science and faculty of business and so on, so forth,” said Atanda.
Atanda then questioned how Girma obtained the student email list, noting concerns about privacy and potential election rule violations.
“Where did you get access to the mailing list? I’m very much interested in finding that out,” he said.
In response, Girma claimed he gathered emails through class lists and argued that the elections team had approved this method.
“The elections team confirmed class lists are fine to use if you’re emailing them individually. This isn’t a public message. I’m not posting on Reddit or Discord — these were individual emails,” replied Girma.
However, Atanda pushed back, alleging that the email goes against SU election bylaws.
“Candidates are not permitted to use the university’s electronic communication system for campaigning. If you did not get an okay from this year’s manual, then I think you were on the wrong track,” said Atanda.
To confirm this, the Gauntlet consulted with SU elections policy, finding Section 20(3) of the ByLaw directly prohibiting candidates from using personal and university contacts.
“Candidates and Campaign Groups are not permitted to use the university’s electronic communications system (e.g. D2L, the UCalgary global address book, etc.) for Campaigning,” reads a statement from the policy.
Girma dismissed the concern raised by Atanda, stating that it wasn’t a problem in previous years.
“They didn’t bring a concern last year, so I assumed they wouldn’t bring a concern this year,” said Girma.
The discussion escalated further when Shah raised concerns about Girma’s attendance record.
“He’s been absent for five of the six Faculty of Arts Student Association (FASA) council meetings without requesting excused absences. If he were a FASA department representative, he would have been fired from his position,” said Shah.
Girma defended himself, citing work obligations.
“I do work 12-hour shifts. I mentioned my situation to the FASA president, and I do have his email,” said Girma.
Shah, however, emphasized that FASA has clear policies for absences.
“There are policies in place. If you are absent, you have to get excused. None of Girma’s absences are recorded as excused on the attendance sheet.”
As the discussion continued, Councillor Al-Najar voiced frustration as an arts representative.
“I’m pretty disgusted and disappointed,” said Al-Najar. “You’re being incredibly disrespectful by saying you won’t listen to us regarding this clear violation of SU policy.”
Despite the criticism, Girma stood his ground, stating that there had been no wrongdoing.
“I want the elections team to mention if there was any wrongdoing. I’m not going to take that from three councillors or two other arts reps,” said Girma.
Post-SLC interview
In a follow-up interview with the Gauntlet, the Faculty of Arts representatives shared their perspective on the situation.
“The email painted the rest of the SU arts reps as non-cooperative and not pulling their weight,” Atanda said. “That email felt like an attack on all the work we have been doing.”
Shah pointed to the concerns of the email potentially going against election policy.
“The main issue with the email is also the fact that it goes against policy, and it is considered pre-campaigning,” said Shah.
Al-Najar also raised cybersecurity concerns, noting that accessing student emails without proper oversight could pose privacy risks.
“They just received a member or an email from the member of the SU, and they were curious as to why they received this email in the first place. The issue was initially about cyber security because the personal information of the students matters significantly to us,” said Al-Najar.
Despite the frustration, the arts representatives emphasized their commitment to student service.
“It’s not personal. We’re all here to help students — that’s why we ran in the first place. But we had to speak up because holding each other accountable is part of the job,” said Shah.
When the Gauntlet reached out to Girma to get a statement regarding the email controversy, he declined to comment.
Voting for the 2025 SU general election will take place from Mar. 4 at 9 a.m. to Mar. 6 at 4 p.m, through the myUofC student centre. In person polling stations are available as well.