In this case, the Judiciary restrained the authority of the SOFC Chair to violate SOFC By-Law when sanctioning organizations. This decision holds that the refusal of a means of returning to good standing as required by Title X of the SOFC By-Law is unlawful.
On August 31, 2017, Kojo Abudu filed a petition with the Judiciary contesting the SOFC’s denial of funding for FORM magazine for the 2017-2018 academic year. The petitioner alleged that the SOFC refused to provide any means for FORM magazine to return to good standing following the failure of FORM magazine to meet a deadline for submitting their annual budget. The petitioner requested that means for returning to good standing be provided so that FORM magazine could receive funding for the 2017-2018 academic year.
The Chair of SOFC assigned a deadline by which annual budgets must be submitted to SOFC through the online qualtrics system. Staff of FORM magazine were aware of this deadline and failed to submit their annual budget on time. This resulted in FORM magazine’s funding being cut-off. Upon contacting the SOFC Chair to remedy the situation, the editor-in-chief of FORM magazine was refused any option to submit their annual budget.
Did SOFC violate their auditing and filing procedures as stated by Title X §8 and Title X §3 and does SOFC’s denial of a budgetary submission qualify as a sanction?
Application of power of the Judiciary Title X, Section 4 of the SOFC By-Law states any group facing a financial suspension “may request judicial review of Financial Suspension, in which case the Judiciary shall promptly convene to decide the issue. It shall be at the discretion of the Judiciary to extend or lift Financial Suspension.”
On SOFC violation of auditing and filing procedures The Judiciary held that the failure by FORM magazine to submit their annual budget on time permitted the use of a financial suspension. However, the subsequent refusal to allow the late submission of a budget and any other means of returning to good standing violated SOFC By-Law.
Conclusion The SOFC was fully within its authority to issue the initial financial suspension but then stepped beyond their authority and deprived FORM magazine of its rights by refusing to provide means for FORM magazine to return to good standing. The Judiciary made a point that financial suspension is intended as a tool to obtain compliance and then be removed as soon as compliance has been achieved, not a tool for punishing organizations or depriving organizations of their rights.