Report on Constitutional Reform by Constitutional Committee

Chaired by Mishal Saeed

10 May 2011

Note: This report is not an exhaustive list of the issues and recommendations observed by the
committee. The committee has briefly pointed out what it felt were the major issues and
recommendations it had regarding the Constitution.

National Union of Pakistani Students and Alumni

www.nupsa.co.uk
Structure of the Constitution:

The Constitution is not meant to be a complicated and secret document jealously guarded by the
executive committee. It is an active document that union members use to raise the issues that concern
them, or that officers can use to seek members‟ views on certain issues.

In every constitution, there exists a basic “structure” and provisions which guarantee the rights of the
society‟s members and prohibits changing the main purpose of the society/charity. That part of the
constitution is always prohibited from being altered and it should be noted that no such provision was
available in the NUPSA Constitution, where Section 7.03 allows any amendments to the constitution
under a simple majority.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Accountability of the Stakeholders:

The Constitutional Committee observed that the current two-way check and balance system in place
between the Executive and General Council has clearly failed. The main reasons for this failure are:

Loss of Identity of the General Council: The major overlap between the Executive and Council, with
over 50% of Council Members also being in the Executive, prevents true accountability of the
Executive. This is because, in case of complaints, a simple majority against any Executive decision
will almost never be achieved within the General Council due to this overlap.

Manipulation of the General Council: The relatively low number of people within the General
Council make it prone to poor electoral practices such as horse-trading, etc. There may also exist a
conflict of interest within Council members which prevent genuine accountability of the Executive.

Procedure of Disciplinary complaints: There is no guideline within the NUPSA Constitution for the
procedure or composition of disciplinary panels. There will always exist a conflict of interest if the
panel composition is not carefully chosen and is not truly unbiased.

Appointment of “NUPSA representatives”: The fact that NUPSA representatives are appointed and
not elected in each affiliate Pakistan Society remains a controversial issue. It was also noted that
certain NUPSA representatives have not been replaced for over two years and there remains a huge
question mark whether NUPSA representatives represent the true voice and opinion of the society
they represent or whether they have simply been “planted” in the General Council. Furthermore, the
NUPSA Constitution has given preference to NUPSA representatives (even over the Affiliate
Society‟s President) in regard to decisions relating to NUPSA including Executive elections. In all
circumstances, planted NUPSA representatives remain an effective method of “controlling the
General Council” for the Executive and it is recommended that this position be abolished immediately
or that these “representatives” should be elected in a fair and transparent procedure.

The best solution to the problems mentioned above would be shifting to a system of three-way
accountability. There exist several options as to what the “third” body be which will enforce check-
and-balance. The two best options which come to mind are either a Board of Governors or the General
Membership of NUPSA. Unfortunately, as of yet, NUPSA has failed to develop a proper membership
database and structure and this should be looked at urgently. Furthermore, it is highly recommended
by the constitutional committee that the General Council and the Executive should be made
completely independent bodies with no overlap.

National Union of Pakistani Students and Alumni

www.nupsa.co.uk
Board of Governors:

There is currently no provision for a “Board of Governors” in the NUPSA Constitution. This is a
necessary requirement for any voluntary organisation as seen in model constitutions and guidelines
put forward by the NUS and the Charity Commission.

The governors are actually responsible for making sure that the organisation is run in line with
government legislation and that the Constitution is respected by the Executive and the Council. If it is
violated, then the governors may wish to pass comment or even take some form of action.

It may be argued as to why the General Council is not adequate enough to make the decisions based
on a simple majority which the Board of Governors has to take. The main argument regarding this is
while the Council does act as a suitable jury, the Board of Governors using their legal and
constitutional skill, has to act as a suitable judge so as to guide the jury in making their decisions. A
jury without a judge will result in making the same errors which resulted in the recent “sham”
amendments in the NUPSA Constitution to be passed as law.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Procedure for Constitutional Amendments:

The Charity Commission has strictly pointed out in its guidelines that the procedure for constitutional
amendments must be clearly written in its governing document. The current NUPSA Constitution
allows any amendments to the Constitution to be made by a simple majority vote of the Council.
There is no mention of procedure, quorum or any conditions upon the amendments.

Upon observation of model constitutions by the NUS and Charity Commission, the Constitutional
Committee noted that:

- All constitutions have a basic structure which guarantee the rights of its members and trustees
and prevent suspension of the constitution. Any amendments to this part of the Constitution
should not be allowed.

- There should always exist a certain part of the constitution, including those which cover the
main purposes and objectives of the organisation, how its resources (including funds) are used,
and powers to change the constitution, which should always require at least a two-third
majority and not only a simple majority. This condition exists in place to prevent any simple
majority government within the General Council from amending the Constitution to meet its
own requirement and agendas without taking anyone from the “opposition” on board as well.

- The part of the constitution which sets out administrative provisions should be allowed to be
amended with a simple majority.

- There is a need to define the exact procedure (including selection of chairperson) and quorum
for any meeting in which constitutional amendments are approved.

- There is also a need to “filter out” certain unacceptable and impractical amendments which are
presented to the Council for approval. This must be done by an independent panel (possibly
the “Board of Governors”) which has reasonable legal and professional experience in this
regard.

National Union of Pakistani Students and Alumni

www.nupsa.co.uk
Fairness of the Executive Electoral Process:

There exists an acute need for the electoral process within NUPSA to be made more fair and
transparent and that elections are held in line with the true principles of democracy. It is essential that
all candidates are given an equal footing and platform to contest elections. The composition of the
“Election Commission” remains a major point of contention as well as the procedure and quorum for
elections. The Constitutional Committee observed that the major issues regarding elections with the
NUPSA Constitution were:

- The presence of previous executive committee members in the Election Commission proved to
be an issue of major concern to several Council members. Given that there is no mention of
election procedure in the Constitution, there were serious concerns that the ex-committee
members would manipulate the election procedure to favour their “handpicked” candidates.

- The independence of “independent” commission members was challenged. There exists a huge
question mark as to who decides if any person is independent or not.

- The eligibility issue also remains controversial. Under the true principles of democracy, it
would be required that all interested and competent candidates should have the right to run for
any position they wish. Any “eligibility” conditions put on any position (including those on
Alumni status) would be a contradiction to the true principles of democracy.

- There also remains the issue of unfair advantage to previous committee or council members
standing in elections who benefit from previous close association with the electorate or from
their access to official NUPSA resources such as contact details of the General Council.

- NUPSA Pakistan voting rights for the President were seen as a way to skew the elections in
favour of the current power-holders. The major point of contention was the fact as to how 7
non-elected executives from NUPSA Pakistan could be given equivalent voting rights as 7
elected Presidents from UK Pakistani societies for NUPSA UK Elections.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Inclusivity for NUPSA Members:

Currently, NUPSA members pay an annual fee but have been given no constitutional rights or
benefits. The Constitutional Committee highly recommends that these members be given
constitutional rights because there is currently no concept of the “masses” in NUPSA. The power
remains concentrated in the Executive and the Union Parliament (also known as the General Council).
True accountability will never be possible unless the “masses” (i.e the NUPSA members) are not
given constitutional rights to challenge the Union Parliament, which in turn will have the right to
challenge the Executive.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Powers of the Executive:

The current system allows for no accountability of the Executive and gives supreme authority to the
President and Vice President even within the Executive. In interests of accountability, powers of the

National Union of Pakistani Students and Alumni

www.nupsa.co.uk
Executive must be curtailed and it must be held accountable to the Council and Governors. The major
issues which the constitutional committee identified were:

- Supreme legislative powers must always be retained by the Union Parliament (General
Council) and NOT the Executive. Powers to remove or censure an officer should only lie with
the General Council and not the Executive. This will ensure operational accountability and
prevent removal of “rogue elements” within the Executive by power politics.

- It was disturbing to note that there was not a consistent two way democratic relationship
between the top executive and the rest of the executive members; where the President was
described as being ‟the ultimate decision-maker‟. The concept of accountability was
conveniently made redundant by making it a top-down process, instead of a two way fair
system where both parties are answerable to one another. Several executive positions were
made directly accountable to the President and the President was also given power to
dismiss/suspend executive members. This is against the basic principles of democracy in
which the President is supposed to be a figurehead and not be given the powers of a dictator.
Also, even though powers of the President were greatly increased in the newly added clauses,
no extra accountability features were added giving the President a free reign to conduct
business in whichever way he/she sees fit.

__________________________________________________________________________________

International Chapters:

The Constitutional Committee observed that legislation regarding International Chapters of NUPSA
was unfortunately inadequate. The international chapter of most concern at this stage is NUPSA
Pakistan, which had just been granted full voting rights for NUPSA UK President. The major
observations which the Constitutional Committee noted regarding this were:

- The deeply centralised system on which the structure of NUPSA is currently based upon is not
feasible. It is hard to understand why a Pakistani-orientated Organisation should have a UK
based „Head” or “President.” NUPSA is not, after all, a political party and so, accordingly, its
structure should not resemble one.

- The structure should be such that participation upon democratic principles is encouraged, with
as much autonomy in the decision and leadership making process being made available to
those involved as practically possible. The Constitution should have a complete procedure and
structure which would require the various „Heads‟ of each International Chapter from working
with one another in co-operation.

- All executive positions within the International Chapters of NUPSA should be democratically
elected. This is currently not the case in Pakistan or Canada and progress on this issue is
urgently needed.

- It is highly recommended that the International Chapters of NUPSA should be run and bound
by their own Constitutions, which must be composed on the true principles of democracy.

National Union of Pakistani Students and Alumni

www.nupsa.co.uk
Binding Nature of the Constitution:

The Constitutional Committee recommends that is absolutely imperative that the NUPSA Constitution
be made fully binding on all members and that disciplinary action be taken against all members and
bodies breaching the Constitution. This is covered in more detail in the “Disciplinary Action” section
of this document.

It was also observed that unfortunately, at several occasions, the constitution was breached by
previous executive committees. The policy of “picking and choosing” which clauses within the
Constitution to follow must be abandoned and all clauses of the Constitution should be made binding
on all members. It is also important to decide which body has the power to interpret the Constitution,
whether it be the Executive, or the Council or the Board of Governors.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Disciplinary Proceedings:

The Constitutional Committee observed that there exists no provision within the NUPSA Constitution
for disciplinary proceedings against Executive or Council members. Furthermore, there exist no
penalties which are highlighted in the NUPSA Constitution for breaches of the Constitution. The only
guidance in this regard is given in the poorly composed “NUPSA Code of Conduct” which has not
been given any constitutional recognition, deals only in cases of certain situations and cannot be
applied universally.

The Constitutional Committee observed there is a strict need to:

- Establish a procedure for any member or party to raise a complaint on any issue.

- To determine the composition of any panel holding a hearing and deciding the penalty.

- Ensure that there is guidance on penalties clearly given in the Constitution.

- Ensure that there is a provision for appeal to any panel decision to a higher independent body
(for e.g the Board of Governors).

__________________________________________________________________________________

Treatment of Affiliate Bodies:

NUPSA has recently been repeatedly accused of not acting as a proper “umbrella” organisation for its
affiliated Pakistan societies with the NUPSA Executive using the resources of its Affiliate Societies
and taking credit in the media and public for all events held with its Affiliate Societies. In order to
counter this, the constitutional committee recommends:

- Ensure that all NUPSA resources to be used to assist the affiliated Pakistan Society.

- All agreements to be written and legally binding including a provision for breach of contract.

- Close monitoring of all financial arrangements and transactions made during any affiliated
event.

National Union of Pakistani Students and Alumni

www.nupsa.co.uk