1. Inquiry: Applicability

1.1. These procedures govern the determination of misconduct in academic research by all University employees, and persons employed under research grants by the University or by its faculty members, including persons who are also students at the University.

1.2. These Procedures shall be consistent with applicable clauses in any existing collective agreement at the university.

2. Receiving Allegations

2.1. An allegation of misconduct in academic research shall be made in writing using the RCR Allegation Submission Form, signed by the complainant(s), dated, accompanied by documented evidence and directed to the President.

2.2. Allegations should be written, with sufficient detail about the nature of the alleged breach, the location and time of its occurrence (e.g. date or timeframe). It should be supported by all available documentation and contain enough information to permit a determination of whether the alleged conduct, if substantiated, would constitute a breach of the Policy and to permit further information gathering about the alleged breach.

2.3. Anonymous allegations will be considered only if all relevant facts are publicly available or otherwise independently verifiable. If all relevant facts are verifiable, the AVPR or Senior Administrator will initiate an Inquiry to determine whether the complaint should be dismissed or investigated. Anonymous complainants are not entitled to participate or receive information on any of the outcome.

2.4. The privacy of both the complainant and the respondent will be protected as far as possible. Individuals making allegations in good faith or providing information related to an allegation will be protected from reprisals to the full extent possible.

2.5. Within 10 days of the receipt of an allegation in writing, the President shall notify the individuals named therein with a copy of the document containing the allegation, provided that the signature(s) of complainant(s) shall be removed.

3. Assessment of Allegations

3.1. The President's authority under Sections 2 and 3 shall normally be delegated to the Vice President Research and Innovation and the Director, Research Ethics and Integrity (Research Integrity Officer - RIO).

3.2. INITIAL ASSESSMENT

a. On receipt of a complaint, the RIO, in consultation with the VPR, must determine:

i. the applicability of the relevant Senate Policy and Collective Agreement provisions to the complaint;
ii. if the allegation(s) were true, if the complaint would constitute misconduct; and
iii. if the complaint is frivolous, vexatious or unsubstantiated.

b. Given the diversity of research and scholarship covered by the Policy, establishing special circumstances and other facts may be of essential relevance when making an initial assessment; hence, prior to reaching the decision to move forward with an allegation, the RIO may request additional information, may consult with the Vice-President (Research and Innovation), with persons in the relevant unit of the University and with others who can provide context for reaching the decision.

c. If it is determined that the relevant Senate policy or collective agreement provisions do not apply, or if the complaints are deemed frivolous, vexatious or unsubstantiated, the allegations, if found to be true, could not constitute misconduct. The RIO, in consultation with the VPRI may recommend to the President to dismiss the complaint as it would be deemed to be out of scope. If the complaint is not dismissed, then the allegation is deemed to be within scope and proceeds to the preliminary inquiry.

3.3. PRELIMINARY INQUIRY

a. If an allegation is within scope, the President will refer the case to the Vice-President Research & Innovation, Associate Vice-President Research and/or Director, Research Ethics and Integrity, who will conduct a Preliminary inquiry. This inquiry may include further discussions of the allegations with the Complainant and requests for additional information via the standard operating procedure for addressing an allegation of a Breach of RCR Policy.

i. Where circumstances warrant or require the University may take immediate action to protect the administration of funding agency funds without first undertaking an investigation and/or identifying research misconduct.
ii. Similarly, subject to any applicable laws including privacy laws, if the allegation involves significant financial, health and safety or other risks and is related to activities funded by the Tri-Agencies, the Institution is required to advise the relevant Council of the Tri-Agencies or the Tri-Agency Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research (SRCR) of the allegation. However, any ambiguity or uncertainty in agency rules or in their application shall be construed in favour of the protection of privacy

b. The Preliminary Inquiry shall normally be completed and report forwarded to the President within 30 business days. In some circumstances, however, an additional 15 business days may be utilized to complete the review. Should this occur, parties to the matter shall be notified.

c. Upon receipt of the Preliminary Inquiry report, the President shall determine whether the allegation warrants further investigation or should be dismissed. Parties to the matter shall be informed of the outcome (President’s decision) in accordance with the Standard Operating Procedure for addressing an allegation of a breach of RCR Policy.

4. Investigation

4.1. If an investigation is deemed to be warranted through the Preliminary Inquiry, the President shall, in writing, notify the persons involved within 30 days. Within 30 more days of such notification, the President shall designate and convene an ad hoc committee of no fewer than 3 persons to conduct the investigation (known as ‘the Committee’).

4.2. Some but not all of the members of the Committee shall be from the same discipline as the person under investigation. In addition, for research funded by the Tri-Agencies, one member of the committee shall be a person not currently affiliated with the University.

4.3. The Committee shall have the discretion to establish in each case, a procedure suitable to the circumstances, provided that in every case, its discretion will be exercised with the following parameters:

a. before any determination of an investigation is made, the person against whom the allegations are made shall have full disclosure of the allegations and evidence and be provided an opportunity to answer in full.

b. the investigation shall proceed in a timely manner; and

c. the proceedings will remain confidential to the extent possible, with a view of protecting persons that are:

i. not party to
ii. witness in the preceding of the identity of the persons making the allegations, and
iii. the person against whom the allegations are made.

4.4. In every case, the detailed procedures of the investigation shall be in accordance with the provisions of the applicable collective agreement.

5. Determination of Findings

5.1. Within 7 days following the conclusion of its investigation, the Committee shall report to the President, in writing, with its findings as to whether misconduct has occurred.

5.2. If the determination is that the allegations are unfounded, the file shall be closed, and all parties will be notified. Every effort will be made to protect the reputation of individuals wrongly subjected to an allegation.

5.3. If the allegations disclosed are shown to constitute misconduct, the President shall determine an appropriate discipline taking into account the severity of the misconduct.

5.4. In every case, the imposition of a discipline shall be in accordance with the provisions of the applicable collective agreement and Faculty regulations in force at the time of the imposition of the discipline.

5.5. In the case of a breach of this Policy, and subject to applicable privacy laws, the President may disclose any information relevant to the breach that is in the public interest including the name of the researcher subject to the decision, the nature of the breach, and the recourse imposed. To inform disclosure of this information, the extent to which the breach jeopardizes the safety of the public, potentially damages the integrity of or brings the conduct of research and/or the University into disrepute will be considered.

6. Records

6.1. Written records shall be kept of the inquiry and investigation and these records shall be kept as confidential files, for a minimum of 3 years within the Office of Research Ethics following the finding of either misconduct or dismissal of the allegation. An annual report of investigations will be compiled and forwarded to the relevant internal and external institutional office (Canadian: CIHR, SSHRC, NSERC; US – NIH if the university has received applicable funding) as or if required.

The post Responsible Conduct of Research, Procedures appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

1. Indoor Individual or Small Group (2-4) Smudging or Pipe Ceremony (for those familiar with smudging)

1.1. Being a Good Neighbour

a. Being a good neighbour means letting the people around you know that you practice smudging on a regular/semi-regular basis. They may notice the aroma, but it dissipates fairly quickly. Share a link to the Smudging Policy if requested.

b. The person leading the smudge is responsible for promptly addressing any concerns or issues that may arise.

c. In personal spaces and dedicated spaces where there is no smoke detector, there is no need for advanced notice.

2. Indoor Medium (5 – 25) and Large (26+) Group Smudging or Pipe Ceremony

2.1. Being a Good Neighbour

a. It is the responsibility for the leader of the Indigenous ceremonial practice to implement the principles of a Good Neighbour and notify nearby spaces of the upcoming Indigenous Ceremonial Practice to ensure good working relationships with the surrounding spaces.

b. Signage will be placed at entry-points prior to the start of the Indigenous Ceremonial Practice to inform the public and participants of the Indigenous ceremonial practice taking place. Signage must include the date, time and location.

c. The lead is responsible for guiding and assisting participants during the ceremony.

d. The lead is responsible for promptly addressing any concerns or issues that may arise.

e. Information will be provided to participants regarding the nature of the Indigenous ceremonial practice for those with allergy or scent sensitivity concerns to accommodate themselves accordingly.

f. Those leading pre-planned large gatherings are to provide advance notice (minimum 72 hours) notice to the AVP Indigenous Initiatives of the intention to smudge or perform pipe ceremonies.

3. Outdoor Smudging or Pipe Ceremony

3.1. Smudging and pipe ceremony is allowed outdoors on any campus without prior notice but should take place no closer than 9 meters to any building entrance.

4. Health & Fire Safety

4.1. The person performing the smudge or pipe ceremony will be responsible for ensuring the presence of fire extinguishers, locating the closest fire extinguisher to the area where the smudging or pipe ceremony is taking place. A small bowl or glass of water should be used to extinguish embers remaining.

4.2. Medicines used for smudging and pipe ceremony must be burned in a fireproof vessel (e.g. earthenware bowl, large shell, stone pipe).

4.3. Leaders of the ceremony must appropriately manage the amount of medicine used in indoor spaces so as not to create enough smoke to overpower the space.

4.4. The ceremonial leader is responsible for ensuring materials are attended to until they have been completely extinguished and disposed of in a culturally appropriate manner.

4.5. For indoor ceremony, doors shall remain closed for the duration of the ceremony and until all smoke has dissipated.

4.6. A designated individual must remain present for the duration of the ceremony to be able to call for assistance in the case of a fire or medical emergency.

4.7. If a fire alarm goes off during smudging or pipe ceremony taking place indoors, evacuate the building as per normal procedures, ensuring any lit medicine is extinguished. If the cause of the alarm is due to the ceremony taking place in a space that is exempt from this policy (see section 6), ceremony lead(s) may be charged for any costs incurred by the University.

5. Respect and Responsibilities

5.1. It is important that a smudge or pipe ceremony as part of a group activity is conducted with respect to both those who choose to be involved and those who choose not to participate.

5.2. The lead is responsible for assigning roles and responsibilities to individuals participating in the ceremony.

5.3. Cultural practices including smudging and pipe ceremonies are voluntary; no individual will be pressured to participate. Individuals who choose to refrain from participating can either stay in the room or leave. Individuals who wish to exit an area where smudging is taking place shall do so quietly, respecting ceremony participants.

5.4. University community members have a responsibility to exercise respect and consideration to one another. Some people may have sensitivity or allergies to the smoke created during the ceremony, and ceremony leads should endeavour to ensure they are given the opportunity to leave the area prior to the event.

6. Exceptions

6.1. Smudging and pipe ceremony cannot be conducted in some spaces for a variety of reasons, including the following spaces:

a. Athletic facilities or areas where aerobic activity is taking place;

b. Kitchens or food preparation spaces;

c. Laboratory facilities;

d. Libraries where smoke may impact rare books or other key archives;

e. Mechanical or industrial workshop spaces where there may be an increased risk of fire;

f. Medical clinics where there may be an increased presence of individuals with respiratory conditions.

6.2. Spaces, including private rooms, that use smoke detectors as their fire detection system must be cleared by facilities services to be used for smudging or pipe ceremony. This may require temporarily bypassing of fire systems for the duration of an event. Facilities service maintains a listing of spaces that use smoke detectors. Facilities also provides a copy of this list to the office of Indigenous Initiatives. Leads must email the University Building and Fire Code Compliance office (firesafe@yorku.ca) and the AVP Indigenous Initiatives (avpii@yorku.ca) to request clearance of these spaces for smudging at least five business days in advance of the ceremony.

The post Smudging and Pipe Ceremony Procedures appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

Smudging and Pipe Ceremonies are welcome on all 91��ɫ campuses. Smudging is a traditional ceremony common to many First Nations and involves the burning of traditional medicines. Historically, Métis and Inuit did not Smudge; however, today many Métis have incorporated Smudging into their lives. Common medicines used in the territory where 91��ɫ campuses are located include sage, tobacco, cedar and sweetgrass. A Smudging Ceremony is held when an individual or group believes it is appropriate. Pipe Ceremonies led by Pipe Carriers are sacred events held for various reasons including asking for blessings, marking and elevating intentions, starting an important journey, or seeking guidance.

Under Section 13 of the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, Smudging, the use of tobacco, the smoking of tobacco or holding lighted tobacco by First Nations and Métis persons for traditional First Nations and Métis cultural or spiritual purposes are permitted. Sage and cedar Smudges produce a strong and distinct aroma, however the smoke associated with it is minimal and lasts a short time. Sweetgrass has a very mild aroma and produces less smoke. Tobacco is used in both Smudging and for Pipe Ceremonies.

From 1885 and lasting until 1951 Indigenous people in Canada were banned from participating in ceremonies. The effects of this prohibition are still felt today. This policy will ensure that Indigenous people can once again engage in the cultural practice of Smudging and Pipe Ceremonies without fear of reprisal. It is a critical acknowledgement of Indigenous people’s rights.

2. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to ensure Indigenous people’s right to ceremony is recognized and respected.

3. Scope and Application

This policy applies to all members of the University community on all University campuses, locations, and leased spaces, as well as temporary field operations, University-organized or sanctioned off-site activities under the control of University staff.

This policy will be read in conjunction with other applicable University policies. The requirements identified in the Smoking Policy shall not apply to the performing of Pipe Ceremonies. The requirements identified in the Policy on Posters shall not apply to posting ceremony notices.

4. Definitions

Ceremony: Connecting to the physical and spiritual world, provide healing, clarity, and to provide gratitude and recognition.

Pipe Ceremony: a sacred ceremony led by a Pipe Carrier that often involves the offering of a Pipe to the seven cardinal points: the Four Directions; the Above or Spirit World; the Below or Mother Earth; and the Centre of all living things.

Smudging: is the practice of burning medicines to prepare oneself/an area to begin something new with a good heart and a good and open way.

Spaces: public spaces (e.g. classrooms), events and gatherings (not taking place in personal or dedicated spaces), personal spaces (residence rooms, offices), and dedicated spaces.

Traditional Medicine: The World Health Organization identifies “traditional medicine” as “the sum total of knowledge, skills and practices based on the theories, beliefs and experiences indigenous to different cultures, whether explicable or not, used in the maintenance of health as well as in the prevention, diagnosis, improvement of treatment of physical and mental illness.”

5. Policy

5.1 Smudging and Pipe Ceremonies are both welcome and celebrated on 91��ɫ campuses. All should feel welcome to participate, or not, at their discretion. Smudging and Pipe Ceremonies may be part of an event, personal practice, or a university function.

5.2 It is important that a Smudge or Pipe Ceremony as part of a group activity is conducted with respect to both those who choose to be involved and those who choose not to participate.

5.3 Cultural practices including Smudging and Pipe Ceremonies are voluntary; no individual will be forced or pressured to participate.

a. University community members have a responsibility to exercise respect and consideration to one another. Some people may have sensitivity or allergies to the smoke created during the ceremony, and ceremony organizers should endeavour to ensure they are given the opportunity to leave the area prior to the event.

b. Individuals who choose to refrain from participating can either stay in the room or leave. Individuals who wish to exit an area where smudging is taking place shall do so in a quiet manner that is respectful of ceremony participants.

5.4 In the event of large, pre-planned gatherings where a Smudge or Pipe will be lit on a particular day; it is recommended that:

a.�� advance notice (24-48 hours’ notice) be given to the AVP Indigenous Initiatives at avpii@yorku.ca;

b.�� signs are posted at entry-points to let community members know that Smudging or Pipe Ceremonies are occurring.

5.5 In personal spaces and dedicated spaces there is no need for advanced notice where there is no smoke detector.

5.6 Smudging and Pipe Ceremonies are allowed on 91��ɫ campuses and in 91��ɫ facilities. Please refer to Procedures for a list of exceptions.

5.7 Spontaneous Smudging or Pipe Ceremonies may occur and take place in any space not on the restricted spaces list.

6. Roles & Responsibilities

6.1 The Vice-President, Equity, People and Culture is responsible for establishing procedures pursuant hereto from time-to-time regarding any matter set out in this Policy.

6.2 The AVP Indigenous Initiatives is responsible for:

a. the implementation of this Policy; and

b. providing assistance and advice to community members seeking to organize a Smudging or Pipe ceremony.

6.3 Ceremony organizers are responsible for:

a. ensuring Smudging or Pipe ceremonies are not conducted in exempted spaces;

b. providing advance notice, where possible, to the AVP Indigenous Initiatives when organizing large or preplanned gatherings involving Smudging or Pipe ceremonies; and

c. posting signs, where possible, at large indoor gatherings at entry-points to indicate that Smudging or Pipe ceremonies are occurring in an area.

7. Review

The Vice-President, Equity, People and Culture is responsible for the review of this policy every 5 years at a minimum.

The post Smudging and Pipe Ceremony Policy appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

Responsibility: Director, ORE; Manager, Advisor, Coordinator, ORE; members of Human Participants Review Committee (HPRC)

1. Scope of Research Ethics Review:

1.1. All University-based research involving human participants, whether funded or non-funded, faculty or student, scholarly, commercial, or consultative, is subject to the ethics review process. Research subject to review includes, but is not limited to, surveys, questionnaires, interviews, and participant observation. It should be noted that if researchers at 91��ɫ reference their affiliation to the University or use any of its resources when engaging in research, they must submit their research proposal to the HPRC for research ethics review in accordance with this policy.

1.2. As per TCPS2 (2022, p. 14) research is “defined as an undertaking intended to extend knowledge through a disciplined inquiry and/or systematic investigation. The term “disciplined inquiry” refers to an inquiry that is conducted with the expectation that the method, results, and conclusions will be able to withstand the scrutiny of the relevant research community”. Human participants are “individuals whose data, biological materials, or responses to interventions, stimuli or questions by the researcher, are relevant to answering the research question(s)” (2022, p. 14).

1.3. All course-based research activities involving human participants are also subject to REB review. While the primary purpose is pedagogical, they may pose possible risks to those recruited to participate in such activities, and from their perspective, such activities may appear indistinguishable from those that meet the TCPS’s definition of research (2022, p. 14).

1.4. All pilot and preliminary research activities involving human participants are also subject to HPRC review. Pilot studies are smaller versions of the main study (e.g., fewer participants, shorter duration) with the purpose of assessing the feasibility and/or inform the design of a subsequent study intended to address a research question (2022, p. 14).

1.5. The HPRC only reviews research that falls within the scope of research as defined by the Tri-Council Policy Statement; however, the HPRC is responsible for reviewing research involving human participants to determine if it is exempt from ethical review. Researchers are responsible for obtaining confirmation from the HPRC on whether or not their project is exempt from ethics review. In accordance with the TCPS, research not requiring REB review and approval include:

1.5.1. activity not defined as research or does not involve human participants as defined by the TCPS2. The key consideration when making the determination as to whether ethics review is required is to ascertain whether research is the intended purpose of the undertaking or not. Researchers are advised to consult with the Office of Research Ethics when unclear as to whether their research project requires ethics review before commencing any research activities;

1.5.2. legally and publicly accessible information or data where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy;

1.5.3. observation of people in public spaces where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, is not epidemiological in nature, involves no direct interaction or intervention by the researcher, and dissemination does not identify specific individuals;

1.5.4. interaction with individuals who are not themselves the focus of the research (e.g., collecting information from authorized personnel about the ordinary course of their employment, organization, policies, procedures, professional practices, or statistical reports);

1.5.5. research that relies exclusively on secondary use of anonymous information, or anonymous human biological materials, so long as the process of data linkage or recording or dissemination of results does not generate identifiable information. However, when there is a reasonable prospect that this data could generate information identifiable as originating from a specific Indigenous community or a segment of the Indigenous community at large, REB review is required;

1.5.6. quality assurance and improvement studies, program evaluation and performance reviews, testing within normal educational requirements when used exclusively for assessment, management, or improvement purposes;

1.5.7. creative practice whereby an artist makes or interprets a work or works of art or studies the process of how a work of art is generated. However, research that employs creative practice to obtain responses from participants that will be analyzed to answer a research question is subject to REB review;

1.5.8. exploratory phase of a research project where the intent of the researcher is to assess the feasibility of the project, establish relationships and/or partnerships with potential participants or to inform the research design or questions. The preliminary phase of research should not be confused with “pilot studies” or “preliminary research”. Researchers are still required to submit an ethics protocol which clearly outlines activities to be undertaken in the exploratory phase of the research so as to afford the HPRC the ability to assess whether ethics review and approval of that portion of the research may in fact be required.

2. Research Ethics Review Process and Procedures:

2.1. Principles of Research Review:

2.1.1 Respect for human dignity is the underlying value of ethics review. Per TCSP2 respect for human dignity is expressed through three core principles: Respect for Persons, Concern for Welfare, and Justice.

2.1.2 Respect for persons recognizes the intrinsic value of human beings (including their data and biological materials) and incorporates the dual moral obligation to respect autonomy while protecting those with developing, impaired, or diminished autonomy. Respecting autonomy requires participants’ free, informed, and ongoing consent and choice. Human participants should be clearly, fairly, and fully informed of the research objectives, procedures, foreseeable risks, and potential benefits. Their decision to participate should be fully voluntary (TCPS2 2022: 6).

2.1.3 The welfare of a person is the quality of that person’s experience of life in all its aspects (physical, mental, and spiritual health, economic, and social circumstances etc.). Researchers and HPRC should aim to protect the welfare of participants, and, in some circumstances, to promote that welfare in view of any foreseeable risks associated with the research (TCPS2 2022: 7). The risks (if any) should never be excessively harmful, and the risk-to-benefit ratio should be taken into consideration when proposing the research. Research design should be especially sensitive to ethical issues when the research involves not legally competent individuals and vulnerable populations as well as when it involves risky procedures, deception, or withholding of information. Participants’ anonymity and confidentiality shall be fully protected, unless this right is expressly waived (or unless disclosure is authorized or required by law).

2.1.4 Justice refers to the obligation to treat people fairly and equitably. Equity requires distributing the benefits and burdens of research participation in such a way that no segment of the population is unduly burdened by the harms of research or denied the benefits of the knowledge generated from it. Historically some groups of people have been either excluded or inappropriately targeted in research. As such, the recruitment process should be based on inclusion and/or exclusion criteria that are justified by the research question (TCPS2 2022: 8).

2.2. Research Ethics Review Procedures:

2.2.1. All researchers must complete and submit the relevant Protocol Form for ethics approval to the appropriate ethics review body. The review shall be conducted according to the principles and procedures set out in this document.

2.2.2. Research that is subject to ethics review and that is not approved may not be undertaken. Researchers found to have conducted research without ethics approval and/or contrary to an approved ethics protocol may face serious sanctions (please see the Tri-Agency Framework for Responsible Conduct of Research and the YUFA collective Agreement, sub-section 11.03-9 for further information as to the implications of non-compliance with this policy.)

2.2.3. The appropriate level of review is determined by the nature of the research and the level of risks or foreseeable risks to the participants. Ultimate determination of the appropriate level of review rests with the HPRC. Pursuant to the TCSP2 Article 6.1, the default requirement for research involving human participants is ethics review by the full HPRC.

2.2.4. Full Ethics Review - At 91��ɫ, research that poses greater than minimal risk to participants is reviewed by the full HPRC. TCPS2, Chapter 2, defines minimal risk as: “research in which the probability and magnitude of possible harms implied by participation in the research is no greater than those encountered by participants in those aspects of their everyday life that relate to the research”. Further, negative decisions by Delegated Review committees, that is, a decision to not approve a protocol before the committee, must be referred to the HPRC for full review. The HPRC will communicate the result of the final review.

2.2.5. HPRC-Delegated Ethics Review - The TCPS2 describes a “proportionate approach” to the ethics review and clearance process for minimal risk research, Article 6.12. Under this approach, 91��ɫ’s HPRC delegates authority to individual members of the HPRC, including non-voting members such as the Director, ORE and/or Manager and Coordinator, ORE (each a “Reviewer”) for ethics review and clearance of research that poses no more than minimal risk to participants. New submissions of minimal risk research, amendments and annual renewals of approved minimal risk research shall be reviewed by no less than two delegated reviewers. Where delegated reviewers decide that a protocol should not be approved, the protocol will be referred to the HPRC for full board review.

2.2.6. Graduate Theses and Dissertations Research Ethics Review - Ethics review of research that is conducted for the purposes of completion of graduate theses or dissertation that is minimal risk and/or is not funded (please consult the Faculty of Graduate Studies for further information as to what constitutes “funded research” in a graduate context) will be conducted by the delegates of the HPRC, namely, the Chair/Vice-Chair HPRC and Associate Dean(s), Research, Faculty of Graduate studies. Where delegated reviewers decide that a protocol should not be approved, the protocol will be referred to the HPRC for full board review.

2.2.7. Graduate and Undergraduate Course-related Research (including MRPs) Ethics Review - Course-related, non-funded, minimal risk research proposed by students in Departments, Schools or Graduate Programs, with the exception of theses and dissertations, are subject to review by the relevant Faculty/Departmental level Ethics Review committee. Departmental/Faculty level review committees must be comprised – at a minimum – of two members.

2.2.8. Administrative Review - For minimal risk research and/or protocols that have undergone a delegated review by another REB, administrative reviews will be conducted by a member of the Office of Research Ethics (Director, Manager, Policy Advisor or Coordinator – with oversight from Sr. ORE rep).

2.2.9. Annual Renewals - At a minimum, research that extends beyond one year and/or the expiry date of the certificate of ethics approval must be renewed. Researchers must submit an application for renewal of ethics approval prior to the expiration of the approval certificate in order to maintain on-going compliance.

2.2.10. Progress Report - Research that is more than minimal risk may require and be subject to greater post approval monitoring to ensure the continued protection of participants rights and researcher’s responsibilities. Consequently, the HPRC may require researchers to provide more frequent progress reports on the status of their research than that of the standard Annual Renewal application. The need for progress reports will be project specific and determined on a case-by-case basis. The need for and number of progress requirements are the discretion of the HPRC.

2.2.11. Amendments to Protocols - Researchers are required to complete and submit an amendment application outlining any proposed changes to their approved protocol, to the HPRC in as timely a manner as possible. Approval for said changes must be received prior to the continuation of the research. Researchers may not proceed with their proposed amended research until such time as the proposed amendments have received ethics approval. Substantive changes to approved protocols may be required to undergo full committee review and the subsequent submission of a new protocol.

2.2.12. Adverse and Unanticipated Events - Researchers are required to report any unanticipated or adverse events to the HRPC as soon as possible, or immediately if the risk to the participants of the event is significant. Documentation of said events must be submitted to the Office of Research Ethics as soon as possible and should include a description of the event or issue and how the researcher has addressed the matter. The HPRC will review reports of adverse or unanticipated events and may, as a consequence, require the researchers to amend their protocols to prevent future recurrences.

2.2.13. End of Project Reporting - Researchers are required to complete an “End of Project Report” so as to notify the HPRC of the completion of their research project.

2.2.14. Incidental Findings - Researchers are obligated to ensure that participants are provided with the information necessary to maintain consent to participate. Thus, should information become known or available that may have an impact on participants or may impact their continued participation in the project, researchers are required to inform the participants as soon as possible. Similarly, should it become known to researchers that there are new potential significant risks to participants or substantial benefits, participants must be informed of the changes immediately. Similarly, any material incidental findings (i.e. findings that have been interpreted as having significant welfare implications for the participant, whether health-related, psychological or social) may be required to be disclosed to the participants. The Office of Research Ethics must receive documentation of any changes to the risks to or benefits for the participants or any material incidental findings of which researchers become aware and/or that have been disclosed to participants.

2.2.15. Confidentiality: All information provided by Principal Investigators is confidential and shall be retained in the files of the Office of Research Ethics on that basis to the fullest extent possible by law.

2.3. Reconsideration and Appeals:

2.3.1. A researcher may request reconsideration of a decision made by the HPRC within 30 days of receiving notice of the HPRC’s decision. The onus is on researchers to justify the grounds on which they request reconsideration and to indicate any alleged breaches to the established research ethics review process, or any elements of the HPRC decision that are not supported by the TCPS2. The HPRC shall review the reconsideration request and respond to the researcher within 30 days of receiving the request.

2.3.2. Should the HPRC and the researcher fail to come to an agreement with regards to the committee’s decision, the researcher may appeal the ethics review body’s decision to the 91��ɫ Ethics Appeal Committee which shall conduct an ethics review of the research Protocol and the procedures followed by the body that conducted the first review. Decisions of the 91��ɫ Ethics Appeal Committee are final and binding.

The post SOP: HPRC Ethics Review Process and Procedures appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

Responsibility: the Associate Vice-President, Research and Innovation, Director, ORE; Manager, Advisor, Coordinator, ORE; members of Human Participants Review Committee (HPRC)

1. Composition of the HPRC Membership:

1.1. The HPRC must be comprised of at least five members (TCPS2, 2022). Its membership shall have representation across Faculties at the University and be diverse in gender with appropriate representation from racialized and other distinct communities.

1.2. The HPRC shall minimum consist of:

1.2.1. a Chair (1) with experience in research ethics;

1.2.2. a Vice Chair (1) with experience in research ethics;

1.2.3. at least one member from each Faculty (The Faculty of Liberal Arts & Professional Studies shall provide at least 2 members to the HPRC to reflect the wide range of disciplines represented and the size of its faculty complement);

1.2.4. at least one (1) member from the University Libraries;

1.2.5. at least one (1) member knowledgeable in ethics theory, knowledge, and practice;

1.2.6. at least one (1) member knowledgeable in relevant law (cannot be legal counsel or risk management representative for the University);

1.2.7. at least one (1) community representative who has no affiliation with the University;

1.2.8. the Associate Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies (ex-officio, for purposes of graduate research review);

1.2.9. Director, Office of Research Ethics, (non-voting reviewer);

1.2.10. Manager, Office of Research Ethics (non-voting reviewer);

1.2.11. Policy Advisor, Office of Research Ethics (non-voting reviewer);

1.2.12. Research Ethics Review Coordinator (non-voting reviewer);

1.2.13. the University Privacy Officer, the Biological Safety Officer, the Vivaria Supervisor and/or University Veterinarian(s) shall provide HPRC with support and advice where relevant as non-voting members.

1.3. The above noted composition is the minimum requirement. Given the broad range of disciplines and disparate nature of research conducted by 91��ɫ researchers, to better address the complex needs of ethics review processes 91��ɫ’s HPRC membership exceeds the minimum standard.

1.4. The HPRC shall make use of ad hoc advisors in the event that it lacks specific expertise and/or to assist with excessive workload. Ad hoc reviewers shall not be counted in quorum for the HPRC, nor be allowed to vote.

1.5. The Chair of the HPRC shall be appointed by the Associate Vice-President, Research, on the recommendation of Committee members. The Chair should, generally, serve for a term of one year. However, if a suitable Chair is not available, the Chair may serve more than one year.

1.6. The term of service for members on the HPRC is three years, with the expectation that one-third of the membership will be appointed each year to ensure continuity and consistency of membership.

1.7. Each Faculty and the University Library shall recommend candidates to the Associate Vice-President Research and shall nominate replacement candidates promptly should a vacancy arise to ensure continuity of representation. Faculty member appointments shall be consistent with the principles of Guidelines and Procedures for Senate Nominations.

1.8. A roster of substitute members may be appointed by the Associate Vice-President, Research, to ensure continuity and compliance of the ethics review process in the event of illness and/or other unforeseen circumstances which prevent a quorum of membership of the committee and/or a lack of appropriate representative disciplines for the purposes of review.

2. Training of the HPRC membership:

2.1. The HPRC members are required to have the relevant expertise and training to undertake appropriate ethics review of research involving human participants. Consequently, each new member of the HPRC shall receive relevant training as it relates to research ethics policy and research ethics review procedures and processes.

2.2. Training shall be provided by the Office of Research Ethics (ORE). New members will be provided with the resources necessary to undertake their responsibilities as HPRC members effectively, efficiently and appropriately.

2.3. In addition to the training provided by ORE, the HPRC members are required to complete the TCPS2 online tutorial. On-going training will be provided to members of the HPRC through education and outreach activities where relevant and necessary.

3. HPRC Meetings, Quorum and Attendance:

3.1. The HPRC shall meet regularly and a minimum of 4 - 6 times annually for the purposes of discharging its responsibilities.

3.2. At least once yearly, a meeting of the HPRC may be convened for the purposes of reviewing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), reports of delegated review processes (including Graduate Theses and Dissertation Ethics review committees and Faculty/Departmental level Ethics Review Committees) and other operational and reporting documents where appropriate and applicable.

3.3. Additional and emergency meetings of the HPRC can be convened at the request of the Chair or members of the Committee for the purposes of reviewing research that is problematic, contentious or for which a consensus decision cannot be reached via regular review processes.

4. HPRC Standard Operating Procedures and/or Guidelines:

4.1. To ensure consistency of decision-making processes as well as to ensure accountability of said processes, wherever possible, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) or Operations Guidelines should be developed and implemented as they speak to HPRC operations. SOPs shall be developed, reviewed and updated, where applicable, on a regular basis.

4.2. All relevant SOPs will be developed by and housed in the Office of Research Ethics (ORE) and subject to review and/or approval by the HPRC where applicable.

5. HPRC and Delegated Ethics Review Committee(s) Reporting Requirements:

5.1. The HPRC is required to provide an annual report to Senate via the APPRC for the purposes of information and oversight. The report shall include a list of all HPRC approved protocols, Faculty annual reports (and delegated reviews), an overview of REB operations, education and outreach activities, a report on activities of the Committee and the Office of Research Ethics, and any other relevant matters.

5.2. Delegated Ethics Review Committees (Graduate Theses and Dissertation Committee and Faculty/Departmental Level Review Committees) are required to provide regular reports to the HPRC with regards to decisions rendered on protocols submitted to said committees. At a minimum, said committees are required to provide a list of all protocols and/or projects and/or courses that have received ethics approval on an annual basis. Those protocols which have not received approval must similarly be reported to the HPRC along with the rationale for the decision of the committee.

6. Conflict of Interest:

6.1. Any conflict of interest that exists or may appear to exist as it relates to any of the researchers must be described, even though this need not preclude the continuance of the research. A conflict of interest may exist if there is potential benefit to the researcher(s) beyond the professional benefit from academic publication or presentation of the results (and consequent honoraria, royalties, etc.).

6.2. In addition to researcher conflict of interest, there may be institutional conflicts of interests, as well as REB members’ conflict of interest. As a consequence, while researchers are required to state clearly any and all real or perceived conflict of interest on ethics protocols submitted to the committee for review, HPRC members are similarly required to state any real or perceived conflicts of interest they may have with regards to a particular protocol before the committee for review. To better manage such conflicts, HPRC members will be required to recuse themselves from deliberations of said protocols. To manage institutional conflicts of interests, any real, potential or perceived institutional conflicts of interest should be reported to the HPRC in accordance with the approved Senate Conflict of Interest policy.

6.3. While it is preferable that conflicts of interest be avoided, in those cases where a conflict of interest cannot be avoided, researchers must declare said conflicts to the REB and research participants alike, in as much detail as possible. Researchers are required to minimize or manage identified conflicts and provide the REB with a detailed description of how such conflicts will be managed. For those instances where there may be a financial conflict of interest, researchers shall disclose all kinds and amounts of payment to the researchers by sponsors, commercial interests and consultative or other relationships. Where concerns are raised with regards to potential financial conflicts of interest, the REB may require researchers to provide a copy of their budget so that it may be examined for inappropriate payments or unexplained expenses.

6.4. Researchers should be aware that the REB can determine, upon review of the stated conflict of interest and proposed method for management of same, that the researcher withdraw from the research or that others on the research team who are not in a conflict of interest make research-related decisions. Further, the REB has the discretion to prohibit certain kinds of payment and the discretion to refuse to approve a protocol for which it feels the implications of the conflict of interest are too significant and/or cannot be managed effectively.

The post Research Involving Human Participants - SOP: HPRC Terms of Reference appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

1.1 Research Ethics Board and Governance Framework

An appropriate and compliant governance structure is a fundamental element of any effective ethics review policy and process. The governance structure ensures that the relevant Research Ethics Board (REB) operates with a clear mandate, authority and accountability, within clearly defined responsibilities and with the institutional independence necessary to undertake their decision-making processes appropriately and effectively. 91��ɫ has two university wide REBs – the IREB and the HPRC. The Indigenous Research Ethics Board – the IREB – reviews ALL research involving Indigenous Peoples; this includes all student and faculty-led research. The 91��ɫ Research Ethics board – the HPRC – reviews ALL non-Indigenous research. 91��ɫ’s Research Ethics Boards – IREB and the REB are sub-committees of the Academic Policy, Planning and Research Committee of Senate.

1.2 Overall Mandate of the IREB

The IREB, on behalf of the institution, is mandated to review all Indigenous human participant research including approving, rejecting, proposing modifications to or terminating of any proposed or ongoing research involving humans. Additionally, upon request of individual researchers, it will engage with researchers throughout the entire research process, including meeting with and providing advice from conceptualization of research through to its completion and dissemination. This mandate extends to all research conducted under the auspices of or within the jurisdiction of the institution.
In keeping with the requirement of the Tri-Council Policy Statement that the highest body of the institution shall establish the REB(s), Senate has created the Indigenous Research Ethics Board (IREB) and, for non-Indigenous Research the 91��ɫ Research Ethics Board (HPRC). Appointments to the IREB shall be made by the Associate Vice-Presidents, Research who oversee research with human participants as delegated by the Vice-President, Research and Innovation upon the sole recommendation of the Indigenous Council at 91��ɫ.

1.3 Membership

a. The composition of the IREB shall reflect the University’s commitment to diverse Indigenous nations and Indigenous Peoples (First Nations, Inuit, and Métis) as well as principles of diversity, equity, decolonization inclusion. In recognition of the limited number of Indigenous scholars on campus the term of service for members shall be 3 years.

b. At a minimum, the TCPS requires that a REB must be comprised of 5 members. Accordingly, the IREB shall be comprised of at least 5 faculty members including a diversity of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Peoples and gender identities. The Indigenous Council shall nominate candidates to the Associate Vice-Presidents Research. The faculty member appointments shall be consistent with the principles of Guidelines and Procedures for Senate Nominations.

c. The IREB shall also consist of at least three external Elders/Knowledge Keepers and the Chair of the Research Responsibility Group of the Indigenous Council. This composition must be maintained at all times in order to ensure compliance with this

d. In addition, IREB shall have:

i. three Indigenous community representatives (at least one of whom will be a youth 16-19 years) who have no affiliation with the University and who will be provided an annual honourarium. The Indigenous Council shall nominate candidates to the Associate Vice-President Research.

ii. at least one Indigenous undergraduate and one graduate student each of whom will be provided an annual stipend. The Indigenous Council shall nominate candidates to the Associate Vice-President.

e. The following shall provide the IREB with administrative support and advice where relevant as non-voting members:

i. the Director, Office of Research Ethics

ii. the Manager, Office of Research Ethics

iii. the Director, Information, Privacy and Copyright

iv. the Biological Safety Officer

f. Additional members may be appointed as required to ensure that all relevant subject areas are adequately represented. Further, where full membership is not warranted or applicable, Ad Hoc Advisors may be consulted. The advice of Ad Hoc Advisors will be sought in the event that the IREB does not have the discipline specific expertise or requisite knowledge to provide appropriate review of a particular ethics protocol. It should be noted that Ad Hoc Advisors are not members of the IREB and therefore do not count towards quorum nor do they vote on IREB decisions.

1.4 Chair and Vice-Chair

The Chair of IREB shall be appointed by the Associate Vice-Presidents Research, as delegated by the Vice-President Research and Innovation, on the sole recommendation of the Indigenous Council. The Vice-Chair will be chosen on the recommendation of IREB Committee members. The Chair should, generally, serve for a term of three years with a possibility of renewal if or as needed.

1.5 Substitute Membership

A roster of substitute members to the IREB may be appointed by the Associate Vice- Presidents, Research to ensure continuity and compliance of the ethics review process in the event of illness and/or other unforeseen circumstances which prevent a quorum of membership of the committee and/or a lack of appropriate representative disciplines for the purposes of review.

1.6 Training

IREB members shall receive relevant training as it relates to research ethics policy and research ethics review procedures and processes.

Training shall be provided by the Office of Research Ethics in conjunction with the Indigenous Council. New members will be provided with the resources necessary to undertake their responsibilities as IREB members. In addition to the training provided by Office of Research Ethics (ORE) & Indigenous Council (IC), IREB members are expected to complete the TCPS online tutorial. On-going training will be provided to members of the IREB through education and outreach activities where relevant and necessary.

1.7 IREB Standard Operating Procedures and/or Guidelines

In order to ensure consistency of decision-making processes as well as to ensure accountability of said processes, wherever possible, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) or Operations Guidelines should be developed and implemented as they speak to IREB operations. SOPs shall be developed, reviewed and updated, where applicable, on a regular basis. All relevant SOPs will be developed by and housed in the Office of Research Ethics and subject to review and/or approval by the IREB where applicable.

1.8 IREB Meetings, Quorum and Attendance

The IREB shall meet periodically and a minimum of 1 - 2 times annually for the purposes of discharging its responsibilities. At least once yearly, a meeting of the IREB may be convened for the purposes of reviewing SOPs, and other operational and reporting documents where appropriate and applicable. Additional and emergency meetings of the IREB can be convened at the request of the Chair or members of the Committee for the purposes of reviewing research that is problematic, contentious, or for which a consensus decision cannot be reached via regular review processes. Quorum must include the Chair, at least one Elder, one community member and 3 additional members.

1.9 Reconsideration and Appeals

If an ethics review body refuses to approve the research or if the body requires amendment to the research as a condition of approval and the lead researchers or Principal Investigator disagrees with the proposed amendments, the Principal Investigator may provide a rationale for reconsideration of the IREB decision. Upon receipt of such a request, the IREB is required to provide a prompt reconsideration and decision pertaining thereto. Should the IREB and the researcher fail to come to an agreement with regards to the committee’s decision, the researcher may appeal the ethics review body’s decision to the Indigenous Research Ethics Board Appeal Committee (IREBAC) which shall conduct an ethics review of the research Protocol and the procedures followed by the body that conducted the first review. The appeal body is an ad hoc committee. Membership of the IREBAC shall be drawn from past members of the predecessor Indigenous Research Ethics Advisory Committee (pre- 2023) and/or the Indigenous Research Ethics Board. However, members of the IREB whose decision is under appeal shall not serve on the appeal committee.

Decisions of the Indigenous Research Ethics Board Appeal Committee are final and binding.

1.10 EB(s) Reporting Requirements

The IREB is required to provide an annual report to the Indigenous Council and to Senate via the APPRC for the purposes of information and oversight. The report shall include a list of all IREB approved protocols, an overview of IREB operations, education and outreach activities, a report on activities of the Committee and the Office of Research Ethics, and any other relevant matters.

1.11 Conflict of Interest

a. Any conflict of interest that exists or may appear to exist as it relates to any of the researchers must be described, even though this need not halt the research. A conflict of interest may exist if there is potential benefit to the researcher(s) beyond the professional benefit from academic publication or presentation of the results (and consequent honoraria, royalties, etc.). In addition to researcher conflict of interest, there may be institutional conflicts of interests, as well as IREB members’ conflict of interest. Just as all researchers are required to state clearly any and all real or perceived conflict of interest on ethics protocols, so too IREB members are bound to the same disclosure and are required to state any real or perceived conflicts of interest they may have with regards to a particular protocol before the committee for review. To better manage such conflicts, IREB members will be reminded that they are required to recuse themselves from deliberations of any such research protocols. To manage institutional conflicts of interests, any real, potential or perceived institutional conflicts of interest should be reported to the relevant REB in accordance with the approved Senate Conflict of Interest policy.

b. While it is preferable that conflicts of interest be avoided, in those cases where a conflict of interest cannot be avoided, researchers must declare said conflicts to the IREB and research participants alike, in as much detail as possible. Researchers are required to minimize or manage identified conflicts and provide the IREB with a detailed description of how such conflicts will be managed. For those instances where there may be a financial conflict of interest, researchers shall disclose all kinds and amounts of payment to the researchers by sponsors, commercial interests and consultative or other relationships. Where concerns are raised with regards to potential financial conflicts of interest, the IREB may require researchers to provide a copy of their budget so that it may be examined for inappropriate payments or unexplained

c. Researchers should be aware that the IREB can determine, upon review of the stated conflict of interest and proposed method for management of same, that the researcher withdraw from the research or that others on the research team who are not in a conflict of interest make research-related decisions. Further, the IREB has the discretion to prohibit certain kinds of payment and the discretion to refuse to approve a protocol for which it feels the implications of the conflict of interest are too significant and/or cannot be managed effectively

The post Indigenous Research Involving Human Participants, Procedures appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

1.1. It is the policy of 91��ɫ to ensure the ethical conduct of research involving human participants and to comply in full with the Tri-Council Policy Statement on Research Involving Human Participants (2022) as it may be amended from time to time. The University has two separate and distinct policies that govern its research involving Human Participants:

• The Senate Policy on Research Involving Human Participants
• The Senate Policy on Indigenous Research Involving Human Participants

1.2�� In recognition of distinct Indigenous knowledges and approaches to research that may involve Indigenous Peoples (First Nations, Inuit, and Métis) and to ensure that appropriate sensitivity to cultural and community rights, roles and responsibilities is applied to all research projects conducted under the auspices of 91��ɫ, the Policy on Indigenous Research Involving Human Participants and an autonomous research ethics review board have been established to govern ��the review of all research involving Indigenous Peoples. Since the establishment of research ethics boards (REBs) across Canada, the research ethics process has become a required but transactional relationship in which researchers merely submit a protocol for review, revisions, and approval; most REBs have limited engagement in the actual research process. Given the need to foreground the voice and needs of Indigenous communities[1]

An individual may belong to multiple communities, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous (e.g., as a member of a local Métis community, a graduate students’ society and a coalition in support of Indigenous rights). An individual may acknowledge being of First Nations, Inuit or Métis descent but not identify with any particular community. How individuals define which of their community relationships are most relevant will likely depend on the nature of the research project being proposed.

Within Indigenous research, the Indigenous Research Ethics Board (IREB) at 91��ɫ will be available to engage with researchers throughout the entire research process, including meeting with and providing advice with regards to emerging issues at the intersection of indigenous research and ethics compliance. (The IREB will be supported by the Office of Research Ethics)

1.3 The IREB serves the 91��ɫ research community in at least the following ways:

a. by contributing to the education of its members and the broader 91��ɫ community about research ethics;

b. by acknowledging and promoting the inclusion of expertise from traditional knowledge keepers;

c. by acknowledging and promoting the aim that research should have positive impacts, and repair and reconnect community relationships;

d. by creating relational accountability of research by establishing relationships between the communities in which they serve and 91��ɫ;

e. by acknowledging the interdependence of humans and the natural world and spirit world, and the responsibility that all people have to those relationships;

f. by engaging with researchers and applying an indigenous lens to questions of research ethics as they may arise throughout the entire research process

g. by conducting independent, multi-disciplinary review of research proposals that meet all national requirements; and

h. by overseeing the ethics review processes delegated to and conducted by Faculty, Department, School, and Graduate Program review bodies.

2. Scope and Application��

2.1. Research Involving Indigenous Peoples

a.���������� The policy shall apply to all Indigenous research involving human participants including their lands, materials, human remains, cadavers, tissues, biological fluids, embryos, and fetuses and researchers in all Faculties and the University Libraries conducting such research. The policy is intended to protect Indigenous Peoples and communities, the researcher and/or principal investigator, individual participants, and the University jointly and collectively; it seeks to protect all parties to the research endeavour.

b.�������� The following Policies, Procedures and resources support the Senate Policy on IREB: Research Involving Indigenous People for access to ethics review processes, Researcher Toolkit, IREB protocol forms, IREB ICF and guidelines as they relate to research involving Indigenous Peoples. These resources are accessible on the Office of Research Ethics website.

2.2. Confidentiality

All information provided by Principal Investigators and other researchers is confidential and shall be retained in the Office of Research Ethics on that basis to the fullest extent possible by law.

2.3. Research Not Covered by This Policy and Procedures

Any research activity for which this policy is silent (such as clinical trials, research involving human biological materials and/or human genetic research), the relevant sections of the current (TCPS) shall be relied upon for guidance. Alternatively, researchers may consult with the Office of Research Ethics for advice and direction

3. Definitions

3.1 For the purpose of this policy and its associated procedures, and in accordance with the (2022):

a. ‘research’ is defined as any undertaking intended to extend knowledge through a disciplined or systematic investigation and it includes pilot or preliminary research that involves human participants;

b. Indigenous Peoples includes First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Peoples located within Canada. In this context, the term “Indigenous Peoples” typically refers to persons of Indian, Inuit or Métis descent, regardless of where they reside and whether their names appear on an official register. Self-identification is a fundamental criterion for defining Indigenous Peoples. The term “Indigenous” does not reflect the distinctions among First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, who have their own histories, cultures and languages, so an attempt has been made to limit use of the term in this Policy to instances where a global term is appropriate. Indian peoples commonly identify themselves by distinct nation names such as Mi’kmaq, Dene or Haida, and as First Nations;

c. ‘human participants’ are persons who provide data or information to the researcher, who are not acting in their professional capacity, but as subjects in the public domain;

d. ‘researcher’ and/or ‘Principal Investigator’ includes:

i. any research affiliated with 91��ɫ who conducts or advances the creation or dissemination of new knowledge with, for, or about Indigenous persons in a capacity that accesses University students staff, faculty or any other human participants;

ii. any other person who conducts or advances research and is connected with the University; this includes people affiliated with universities receiving research funds from 91��ɫ;

iii. any person who conducts research using University resources (whether research space, materials, equipment, or human resources).

e. The term “member” when used in this Policy and its accompanying procedures includes Indigenous Elders, Indigenous community members, faculty, emeritus faculty, contract faculty, staff, administrators, students, visiting or adjunct scholars, fellows and chairs, and any research associates or assistants, whether paid or unpaid.

4. Policy and Guidelines

4.1 Policy Statement

It is the policy of 91��ɫ to ensure the ethical conduct of Indigenous research involving human participants and to comply in full with the (2022) as the Tri-Council policy may be amended from time to time.

4.2 Principles and University Commitments

Researchers are obligated to strive for ethical conduct at all times in relation to their research. This IREB policy underscores the importance of a distinctly Indigenous ethics process that reviews all research with, by, for and about Indigenous Peoples at 91��ɫ. The Senate of 91��ɫ affirms that all researchers must respect the safety, welfare, and dignity of human participants in their research and treat them fairly, and not as a means to an end. The University values and protects the academic freedom of its researchers. The ethics review process shall not unfairly censor researchers in the conduct of their research. However, academic freedom is conditional on all researchers respecting the rights and well-being of human participants. The IREB allows for Indigenous approaches, knowledges, and histories to bear on these ethical review processes.

This policy acknowledges the need for ongoing change and refinement of applicable policies to be accountable to Indigenous knowledges, languages, and Peoples, as well as changes in research ethics, methods, and contexts. Ethical guidelines shall be respected and revised as necessary. Continued awareness and debate of the topic in the research community is essential.

The University’s principal reference for ethics review is the , with which the University has agreed to comply pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding (September 2002) between the University and the three funding agencies that make up the Tri-Council.

5. Roles and Responsibilities

5.1 Review by the University’s Indigenous Research Ethics Board applies to all Indigenous research as defined above; for all other research, 91��ɫ’s research ethics board, known as the Human Participants Review Committee (the HPRC)

Similar to the HPRC, the IREB is a sub-committee of the Academic Policy, Planning and Research Committee (APPRC) of Senate. The IREB is charged with reviewing the ethical acceptability of all Indigenous research involving human participants conducted by members of the University, and with carrying out the procedures within its jurisdiction or under its auspices. All research involving human participants conducted by faculty, staff or students, regardless of where the research is conducted, is subject to review and approval by the relevant research ethics board (REB) in accordance with the most recent Tri-Council Policy Statement prior to the commencement of any research activities. The IREB composition, mandate, and operations shall conform to the specifications set out in the procedures that accompany this policy.

5.2 IREB shall report at least annually to the Academic Policy, Planning and Research Committee of Senate. APPRC shall, in turn, transmit reports to Senate and make them accessible.

5.3 The primary responsibility of the IREB is to ensure, through the review and approval of research ethics protocols, that researchers respect the safety, welfare, dignity, rights and diversity of human experience and participants in their research and treat them equally and fairly and not as a means to an

5.4 The IREB shall discharge the following specific duties:

a. engage with researchers by providing advice and guidance as it speaks to the submission of a research ethics protocol by applying an indigenous lens to questions of research ethics as they may arise throughout the entire research process;

b. conduct ethics reviews within the context of the University's responsibility to ensure that the research meets high scientific and scholarly standards. All research involving Indigenous Peoples - student, staff, faculty or external researchers - shall fall under the purview of the IREB for the purposes of review and approval. Only the IREB has the authority to review Indigenous research involving human participants;

c. terminate any research that it considers to be threatening or causing distress to the participants, deviates from the approved Protocol, or has not been approved by the appropriate body;

d. provide Faculties and Libraries with the resources necessary to enable them to become familiar with and adhere to this Senate Policy;

e. act as an advisory body for the University, educating the community on ethics in research and providing guidance on the ethics review policy, processes and procedures;

f. provide resources (outreach and education) to the Faculties and Libraries so as to enable them to provide the necessary education and advice to research assistants and students about the relevant aspects of ethics in Indigenous research and the need to treat participants ethically and

6. Review

This policy will be reviewed by the Office of Research Ethics one year after implementation, and then every five years going forward. During the review, the policy will remain in full force and effect.

7. Procedures

Has associated Procedures.

8. Funding for IREB Operations

8.1 Through both financial and in-kind support from the Office of Research Ethics and the Associate Vice-President Research, the IREB shall have the requisite financial and administrative support (including the funding of at least three traditional knowledge keepers) to ensure that it has both the autonomy and resources to fulfill its responsibilities.

[1] Indigenous Communities – describes a group of people with a shared identity or interest that has the capacity to act or express itself as a collective. In this Policy, a community may include members from multiple cultural groups. A community may be territorial, organizational, or a community of interest. “Territorial communities” have governing bodies exercising local or regional jurisdiction (e.g., members of First Nations who reside on reserve lands). “Organizational communities” have explicit mandates and formal leadership (e.g., a regional Inuit association or a friendship centre serving an urban Indigenous community). In both territorial and organizational communities, membership is defined and the community has designated leaders. “Communities of interest” may be formed by individuals or organizations who come together for a common purpose or undertaking, such as a commitment to conserving a First Nations language. Communities of interest are informal communities whose boundaries and leadership may be fluid and less well- defined. They may exist temporarily or over the long term, within or outside of territorial or organizational communities.

The post Indigenous Research Involving Human Participants appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

Description: ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes, leurs activités et leurs finances

1. Préambule

1.1 Les objectifs de l’Université 91��ɫ, en vertu de la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965, sont de favoriser le développement des connaissances et la diffusion du savoir, d’assurer l’épanouissement intellectuel, spirituel, moral, physique et social de ses membres et de travailler à l’amélioration de la société. L’Université 91��ɫ estime que les organisations étudiantes jouent un rôle important dans la réalisation de ces objectifs. Les organisations étudiantes promeuvent le développement des connaissances, l’épanouissement et la responsabilité civique de ceux qui mènent leurs activités et y participent, et servent ainsi les intérêts de leurs collègues étudiants. De plus, les organisations étudiantes contribuent à la qualité et à la diversité de la vie sur le campus en matière d’éducation, de loisirs et de vie sociale ou culturelle.

1.2 Les relations entre l’Université 91��ɫ et les organisations étudiantes sont régies par le principe selon lequel leurs activités et leur financement des activités étudiantes doivent être menés de manière ouverte, accessible, démocratique, non discriminatoire et responsable sur le plan juridique et financier. Ces conditions sont nécessaires pour que les buts et objectifs de l’Université 91��ɫ soient atteints, et pour que tous les étudiants jouissent de la liberté de s’associer et de s’exprimer par l’intermédiaire d’organisations étudiantes. Dans la mesure où les organisations étudiantes souscrivent à ce principe, l’Université 91��ɫ appuie leur droit de communiquer, d’explorer et de débattre des idées, d’organiser et d’utiliser ses installations à des fins licites, de distribuer des documents sur le campus et d’organiser des manifestations pacifiques. L’Université 91��ɫ ne refuse aucun privilège à une organisation étudiante simplement en raison de ses croyances ou de ses procédures, à moins qu’elles ne soient contraires au principe qui précède ou ne mènent à des activités qui lui sont contraires.

1.3 Les privilèges accordés par l’Université 91��ɫ aux organisations étudiantes en vertu du présent règlement sont fondés sur le respect et la prise en charge de certaines procédures et responsabilités qui donnent effet au principe directeur susmentionné. Ces privilèges peuvent être refusés ou retirés si les procédures ou responsabilités prévues par le présent règlement sont négligées ou ne sont pas respectées.

1.4 Les pouvoirs et responsabilités juridiques conférés par la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965 au président/à la présidente et au conseil des gouverneurs en ce qui concerne les organisations étudiantes et leurs activités et finances empêchent la dévolution complète des pouvoirs aux organisations étudiantes. Toutefois, les pouvoirs et responsabilités respectifs du président/de la présidente et du conseil des gouverneurs doivent être exercés dans la mesure où cela est juridiquement et concrètement possible, d’une manière compatible avec le principe directeur décrit à l’article 1.2 ci-dessus. Le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, agissant au nom du conseil des gouverneurs et du président/de la présidente, soutient et promeut ce��principe directeur.

2. Objet et compétence

2.1 Le présent règlement est pris par le président/la présidente en vertu de l’alinéa 13(2)c) de la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965, et par le conseil des gouverneurs sur recommandation du président/de la présidente en vertu de l’article 10 et de l’alinéa 13(2)g) de la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965, afin de régir les organisations étudiantes et leurs activités et finances.

2.2 Le présent règlement énonce les privilèges et obligations des organisations étudiantes afin de veiller à ce que leurs activités et leur financement soient menés de manière ouverte, accessible, démocratique, non discriminatoire et responsable sur le plan juridique et financier, de manière à ce que les buts et objectifs de l’Université 91��ɫ puissent être atteints.

3. Définitions et principes

3.1 ��é�ھ��Ծ��پ��DzԲ�. Les définitions qui suivent s’appliquent au présent règlement��:

«��association étudiante��» Une organisation représentant tous les étudiants de premier cycle ou de cycle supérieur, ou tous les étudiants d’une faculté ou d’un collège (respectivement, une «��association étudiante centrale��» une «��association étudiante de faculté��» ou une «��association étudiante de collège��»). Une association étudiante s’intéresse normalement à un large éventail d’activités, y compris la représentation des intérêts de ces étudiants dans les discussions avec les autorités universitaires et administratives de l’Université, d’une faculté ou d’un collège. Les associations étudiantes reconnues peuvent être admissibles à des privilèges.

«��bureau de révision��» Le bureau de révision au sens de l’article 13.1 du présent��règlement.

«��club d’étudiants��» Une organisation volontaire et à adhésion qui se consacre à un intérêt ou à une activité en particulier pour un groupe représenté déterminé. Les clubs d’étudiants reconnus peuvent être admissibles à des privilèges.

«��convention d’adhésion à titre de membre associé��» Une convention, entre une association étudiante centrale reconnue et une organisation étudiante reconnue, qui confère aux membres de l’organisation étudiante le statut de membre associé de l’association étudiante centrale reconnue.

«�����dzپ������پ��Dz���» (ou «�����dzپ������پ��DzԲ���») Un droit qui a été approuvé conformément à l’article 10 du présent règlement et que l’Université ajoute au compte financier de chaque étudiant membre d’une organisation étudiante et remet ensuite à l’organisation étudiante visée à sa discrétion.

«��documents constitutifs��» S’entend a) dans le cas d’une organisation étudiante qui est une association non constituée en personne morale, de la constitution d’une organisation étudiante comme il est décrit à l’annexe C; et b) dans le cas d’une organisation étudiante qui est constituée en personne morale, fusionnée ou maintenue en vertu de la Loi sur les personnes morales, L.R.O. 1990, chap. C.38 (la «��LPM��»), de la Loi de 2010 sur les organisations sans but lucratif, L.O. 2010, chap. 15 (la «��LOSBL��») ou d’une législation analogue, des lettres patentes, des lettres patentes supplémentaires, des statuts de constitution/fusion/maintien, des règlements administratifs et des résolutions exceptionnelles ou spéciales de l’organisation étudiante, selon le cas.

«��groupe représenté��» ou «��membres��» La totalité des membres admissibles d’une organisation étudiante comme il est indiqué dans ses documents constitutifs.

«����é�����������پ��Dz���» L’ensemble de la législation, des règles, de la réglementation, des ordonnances et des décrets applicables de toutes les autorités gouvernementales.

«��législation de l’Université��» L’ensemble des textes législatifs promulgués en vertu de la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965, directement ou par délégation de pouvoir, et les autres lignes directrices, politiques, procédures et règles y compris, notamment:

Le Code des droits et responsabilités des étudiants

The Human Rights Policy and Procedures

The Policy on Alcohol and Cannabis Use and Procedures

The Policy on Posters

The Senate Policy on Computing and Information Technology Facilities

The Statement of Policy on Free Speech

The Temporary Use of University Space Policy and Procedures

«��organisation étudiante » Une association étudiante ou un club d’étudiants, mais à l’exclusion du 91��ɫ Student Centre Incorporated. Une organisation étudiante reconnue doit être soit une association non constituée en personne morale, soit une entité constituée en personne morale, fusionnée ou maintenue en vertu de la LPM, de la LOSBL ou d’une législation analogue.

«�������������è�������» Les privilèges prévus à l’article 8 du présent règlement.

«�����𳦴DzԲԲ����������Գ�����» La reconnaissance officielle par l’Université d’une organisation étudiante en tant qu’organisation admissible à des privilèges en contrepartie de l’adhésion au présent règlement. «�����𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ�����» Reconnaître officiellement l’admissibilité aux privilèges en contrepartie de l’adhésion au présent règlement. «�����𳦴DzԲԳ���» Le fait d’avoir cette reconnaissance de l’Université.

«��������é����Գٲ��Գ���» Pour l’application du présent règlement, un représentant de l’Université responsable de l’application du présent règlement, y compris, notamment��:

(a) dans le cas d’une association étudiante centrale, le recteur/la rectrice ou son remplaçant désigné;

(b) dans le cas d’une association étudiante de faculté ou d’une association étudiante de collège, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes ou son remplaçant désigné; et

(c) dans le cas d’un club d’étudiants, le directeur/la directrice de l’engagement étudiant (Director of Student Engagement) ou son remplaçant��désigné.

3.2 Principes. Les principes suivants auxquels les organisations étudiantes doivent souscrire sont expliqués à l’annexe D��:

«�����ܱ��������», «�����������������������», «����é���dz������پ���ܱ���»;

«��Non discriminatoire��»;

«��Responsable sur le plan financier��» (ou «��financièrement responsable»); et

«��Responsable sur le plan juridique��» (ou «��juridiquement responsable»)

4. Reconnaissance des associations étudiantes centrales

4.1�� Reconnaissance des associations étudiantes centrales. L’Université peut ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� une association étudiante centrale.

4.2 Maintien des associations étudiantes centrales. La reconnaissance d’une association étudiante centrale à la dernière date d’entrée en vigueur du présent règlement est maintenue jusqu’à ce qu’elle soit retirée en vertu des articles 11 et 12. Les associations étudiantes centrales maintenues à la promulgation du présent règlement sont��:

(a) Premier cycle��: la Fédération des étudiants de 91��ɫ (FEY) en tant qu’association étudiante centrale de tous les étudiants de premier cycle; et

(b) �پ����ô��é����: 91��ɫ Graduate Students' Association (YUGSA) en tant qu’association étudiante centrale de tous les étudiants diplômés.

4.3 Une association étudiante centrale reconnue comprend et représente tous les étudiants inscrits à un programme d’études de premier cycle ou de cycle supérieur de l’Université 91��ɫ, et est responsable envers tous ces étudiants.

4.4 Chaque étudiant est, dès son inscription à un programme de premier cycle ou de cycle supérieur de l’Université, membre d’une association étudiante centrale reconnue et lui verse une cotisation, soit à titre de membre à part entière, soit à titre de membre associé lorsque l’étudiant est un membre d’une organisation étudiante reconnue avec une convention d’adhésion à titre de membre associé conformément à l’article 4.5.

4.5 Une association étudiante centrale reconnue doit définir et offrir la qualité de membre associé aux termes d’une convention d’adhésion à titre de membre associé pour les catégories d’organisations étudiantes reconnues dont les membres sont bénéficiaires de certaines de ses activités, mais qui ne peuvent pas participer à ses affaires en raison du lieu de leurs études ou d’autres conditions particulières. En outre :

(a) Le Centre de la communauté étudiante et du développement du leadership (Centre for Student Community & Leadership Development («��SCLD»)) servira de ressource aux fins de faciliter les conventions d’adhésion à titre de membre associé; et

(b) La répartition et/ou la (re)distribution des cotisations des étudiants doivent être approuvées par le SCLD.

4.6�� Une seule association étudiante centrale peut être reconnue pour les étudiants inscrits dans des programmes de premier cycle et une seule association étudiante centrale peut être reconnue pour les étudiants inscrits dans des programmes de cycle supérieur.

4.7�� En l’absence d’une association étudiante centrale reconnue pour les étudiants de premier cycle ou d’une association étudiante centrale reconnue pour les étudiants de cycle supérieur, les étudiants du groupe représenté visé peuvent demander la création et la reconnaissance d’une association étudiante centrale comme suit :

Étape 1�� Signifier au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes un avis d’intention de créer et de faire ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� une association étudiante centrale.

Étape 2 Rencontrer le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes pour recevoir des directives et des lignes directrices concernant l’exécution des étapes 3 à 4 ci-après, y compris, notamment, quant à la ou aux questions référendaires pertinentes.

Étape 3�� Obtenir, au moyen d’une pétition, le consentement d’au moins 10 % des étudiants inscrits à titre d’étudiants de premier cycle ou à titre d’étudiants de cycle supérieur, selon le cas, et en soumettre les résultats au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes. Dès réception des résultats de la pétition, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si la pétition a été dûment exécutée conformément aux directives et aux lignes directrices et si elle est, par conséquent, valide. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que la pétition est invalide, il/elle peut demander que la pétition soit refaite ou mettre fin au processus. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que la pétition est valide, il/elle invite les étudiants à passer à l’étape 4.

Étape 4 Tenir, conformément aux lignes directrices et procédures pour la tenue de référendums étudiants à l’Université 91��ɫ (Guidelines and Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda at 91��ɫ) et au moyen du système de vote électronique de l’Université ou d’un système sûr comparable approuvé au préalable par écrit par le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, un référendum auprès des étudiants qui constitueraient les membres de l’association étudiante centrale reconnue, et en soumettre les résultats au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes. Si des pétitions visant la reconnaissance de plus d’une association étudiante centrale sont soumises et jugées valides, le référendum tenu dans le cadre de l’étape 4 doit l’indiquer dans les choix présentés aux étudiants. En cas de multiples pétitions, un référendum préliminaire doit être tenu pour déterminer s’il y a lieu de ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� une association étudiante centrale et, dans l’affirmative, un deuxième référendum doit être tenu sur le choix de l’association étudiante centrale qui sera reconnue. À la réception des résultats du référendum, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si le référendum a été dûment tenu conformément aux procédures pour la tenue de référendums étudiants (Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda) et s’il est, par conséquent, valide. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le référendum n’est pas valide, il/elle peut demander la tenue d’un nouveau référendum ou mettre fin au processus. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le référendum est valide, il/elle certifie le résultat du référendum.

Étape 5 Dans le cas d’une association étudiante centrale qui est une association non constituée en personne morale, soumettre au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes un projet de constitution qui est conforme à l’annexe C du présent règlement et qui a été approuvé par une majorité des membres de l’association étudiante centrale. Dès réception du projet de constitution, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si le projet de constitution est conforme au présent règlement. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le projet de constitution n’est pas conforme, il/elle peut demander que le projet de constitution soit modifié et soumis à nouveau, autant de fois qu’il est nécessaire pour le rendre conforme. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le projet de constitution est conforme, il/elle recommande la reconnaissance de l’association étudiante centrale au président/à la présidente.

Dans le cas d’une association étudiante centrale qui est constituée en personne morale, fusionnée ou maintenue en vertu de la LPM, de la LOSBL ou d’une législation analogue, soumettre au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes tous les documents constitutifs. Dès réception des documents constitutifs, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine s’ils sont conformes au présent règlement. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que tout aspect des documents constitutifs qui n’est pas prescrit par la législation (notamment l’objet ou les processus de gouvernance de l’association étudiante centrale) est incompatible avec les principes d’ouverture, d’accessibilité, de démocratie, de non-discrimination et de responsabilité sur le plan juridique et financier énoncés dans le présent règlement, il/elle peut demander que les documents constitutifs soient modifiés et soumis à nouveau autant de fois qu’il est nécessaire pour que les documents constitutifs respectent ces principes. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que les documents constitutifs sont conformes au présent règlement, il/elle recommande la reconnaissance de l’association étudiante centrale au président/à la présidente.

Étape 6 Dès qu’il/qu’elle reçoit la recommandation du vice-recteur/de la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, le président/la présidente accorde normalement la reconnaissance à l’association étudiante centrale.

4.8�� S’il existe une association étudiante centrale reconnue pour des étudiants de premier cycle ou des étudiants de cycle supérieur, les étudiants du cycle visé peuvent présenter une pétition demandant le remplacement de sa reconnaissance par la reconnaissance d’une autre association étudiante centrale, selon la même procédure que celle prévue à l’article 4.7, avec les adaptations nécessaires.

5. Reconnaissance des associations étudiantes de faculté

5.1�� Reconnaissance d’une association étudiante de faculté. L’Université peut ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� une association étudiante de faculté.

5.2�� Maintien des associations étudiantes de faculté. La reconnaissance d’une association étudiante de faculté reconnue à la dernière date d’entrée en vigueur du présent règlement est maintenue jusqu’à ce qu’elle soit retirée en vertu des articles 11 et 12.

5.3�� Une association étudiante de faculté reconnue comprend et représente tous les étudiants inscrits à des programmes d’études au sein de cette faculté à l’Université 91��ɫ, et est responsable envers tous ces étudiants.

5.4�� Chaque étudiant est, dès son inscription dans une faculté à l’Université, membre de l’association étudiante de faculté reconnue de cette faculté et lui verse une cotisation,

5.5�� Une seule association étudiante de faculté peut être reconnue par faculté.

5.6�� À la date d’approbation du présent règlement, les associations étudiantes de faculté reconnues sont celles qui sont énumérées à l’annexe A.

5.7�� Les étudiants d’une faculté qui n’a pas d’association étudiante de faculté reconnue peuvent demander la création et la reconnaissance d’une association étudiante de faculté comme suit :

Étape 1�� Signifier au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes un avis d’intention de créer et de faire ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� une association étudiante de faculté.

Étape 2 Rencontrer le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes pour recevoir des directives et des lignes directrices concernant l’exécution des étapes 3 à 4 ci-après, y compris, notamment, quant à la ou aux questions référendaires pertinentes.

Étape 3�� Obtenir, au moyen d’une pétition, le consentement d’au moins 10 % des étudiants inscrits à la faculté pour demander, en leur nom, la création et la reconnaissance d’une association étudiante de faculté et en soumettre les résultats au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes. Dès réception des résultats de la pétition, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si la pétition a été dûment exécutée conformément aux directives et aux lignes directrices et si elle est, par conséquent, valide. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que la pétition est invalide, il/elle peut demander que la pétition soit refaite ou mettre fin au processus. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que la pétition est valide, il/elle invite les étudiants à passer à l’étape 4.

Étape 4�� Tenir, conformément aux lignes directrices et procédures pour la tenue de référendums étudiants à l’Université 91��ɫ (Guidelines and Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda at 91��ɫ) et au moyen du système de vote électronique de l’Université ou d’un système sûr comparable approuvé au préalable par écrit par le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, un référendum auprès des étudiants inscrits à la faculté, et en soumettre les résultats au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes. Si des pétitions visant la reconnaissance de plus d’une association étudiante de faculté sont soumises et jugées valides, le référendum tenu dans le cadre de l’étape 4 doit l’indiquer dans les choix présentés aux étudiants. En cas de multiples pétitions, un référendum préliminaire doit être tenu pour déterminer s’il y a lieu de ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� une association étudiante de faculté et, dans l’affirmative, un deuxième référendum doit être tenu sur le choix de l’association étudiante de faculté qui sera reconnue. À la réception des résultats du référendum, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si le référendum a été dûment tenu conformément aux procédures pour la tenue de référendums étudiants (Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda) et s’il est, par conséquent, valide. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le référendum n’est pas valide, il/elle peut demander la tenue d’un nouveau référendum ou mettre fin au processus. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le référendum est valide, il/elle certifie le résultat du référendum.

Étape 5�� Dans le cas d’une association étudiante de faculté qui est une association non constituée en personne morale, soumettre au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes un projet de constitution qui est conforme à l’annexe C du présent règlement et qui a été approuvé par une majorité des membres de l’association étudiante de faculté. Dès réception du projet de constitution, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si le projet de constitution est conforme au présent règlement. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le projet de constitution n’est pas conforme, il/elle peut demander que le projet de constitution soit modifié et soumis à nouveau, autant de fois qu’il est nécessaire pour le rendre conforme. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le projet de constitution est conforme, il/elle recommande la reconnaissance de l’association étudiante de faculté au président/à la présidente.

Dans le cas d’une association étudiante de faculté qui est constituée en personne morale, fusionnée ou maintenue en vertu de la LPM, de la LOSBL ou d’une législation analogue, soumettre au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes tous les documents constitutifs. Dès réception des documents constitutifs, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine s’ils sont conformes au présent règlement. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que tout aspect des documents constitutifs qui n’est pas prescrit par la législation (notamment l’objet ou les processus de gouvernance de l’association étudiante de faculté) est incompatible avec les principes d’ouverture, d’accessibilité, de démocratie, de non-discrimination et de responsabilité sur le plan juridique et financier énoncés dans le présent règlement, il/elle peut demander que les documents constitutifs soient modifiés et soumis à nouveau autant de fois qu’il est nécessaire pour que les documents constitutifs respectent ces principes. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que les documents constitutifs sont conformes au présent règlement, il/elle recommande la reconnaissance de l’association étudiante de faculté au président/à la présidente.

Étape 6 Dès qu’il/qu’elle reçoit la recommandation du vice-recteur/de la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, le président/la présidente accorde normalement la reconnaissance à l’association étudiante de faculté.

5.8 �� En cas de création d’une nouvelle faculté, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes peut donner avis aux étudiants de la nouvelle faculté de la marche à suivre pour demander la reconnaissance d’une nouvelle association étudiante de faculté en vertu de l’article 5.7.

5.9�� S’il existe une association étudiante de faculté reconnue pour une faculté, les étudiants de cette faculté peuvent présenter une pétition demandant le remplacement de sa reconnaissance par la reconnaissance d’une autre association étudiante de faculté, selon la même procédure que celle prévue à l’article 5.7, avec les adaptations nécessaires.

6. Reconnaissance des associations étudiantes de collège

6.1 �� Reconnaissance d’une association étudiante de collège. L’Université peut ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� une association étudiante de collège.

6.2�� Maintien des associations étudiantes de collège. La reconnaissance d’une association étudiante de collège reconnue à la date d’entrée en vigueur du présent règlement est maintenue jusqu’à ce qu’elle soit retirée en vertu des articles 11 et��12.

6.3�� Les étudiants d’un collège qui n’a pas d’association étudiante de collège reconnue peuvent demander la création d’une association étudiante de collège reconnue de la manière prévue aux articles 4.7 et 5.7, modifiée de manière à ce que seuls les étudiants affiliés à ce collège soient habiles à signer la pétition et à voter au référendum. Dès qu’il/qu’elle reçoit la recommandation du vice-recteur/de la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, le président/la présidente accorde normalement la reconnaissance à l’association étudiante de collège.

6.4 Une association étudiante de collège reconnue comprend et représente tous les étudiants de premier cycle affiliés à ce collège à l’Université 91��ɫ, et est responsable envers tous ces étudiants.

6.5 Chaque étudiant de premier cycle inscrit à un programme offert au campus Keele est affilié à un collège de l’Université dès son inscription et devient membre de l’association étudiante de collège reconnue de ce collège et lui verse une cotisation. Dès son inscription à un programme offert au campus Markham, chaque étudiant·e de premier cycle est affilié·e au campus Markham, devient membre du conseil étudiant de Markham et lui verse une cotisation.

6.6�� Une seule association étudiante de collège peut être reconnue par collège.

6.7�� À la date d’approbation du présent règlement, les associations étudiantes de collège reconnues sont celles qui sont énumérées à l’annexe B.

6.8�� S’il existe une association étudiante de collège reconnue pour un collège, les étudiants de ce collège peuvent présenter une pétition demandant le remplacement de celle-ci par une autre association étudiante de collège, selon la même procédure que celle prévue aux articles 4.7 et 5.7, avec les adaptations nécessaires.

7. Reconnaissance des clubs d’étudiants

7.1 �� Reconnaissance des clubs d’étudiants. Les clubs d’étudiants sont créés par les étudiants pour soutenir et promouvoir la qualité et la diversité de la vie sur le campus en matière d’éducation, de loisirs et de vie sociale ou culturelle. L’Université peut ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� un club d’étudiants.

7.2 �� Maintien des clubs d’étudiants. La reconnaissance d’un club d’étudiants reconnu à la date d’entrée en vigueur du présent règlement est maintenue jusqu’à ce qu’elle soit retirée en vertu des articles 11 et 12, ou jusqu’à ce que le club d’étudiants omette de demander ou d’obtenir le renouvellement de sa reconnaissance aux termes de l’article 7.12.

7.3�� Tous les clubs d’étudiants qui demandent une reconnaissance doivent soumettre au SCLD une demande de club d’étudiants remplie qui démontre le respect des exigences suivantes:

(a) Elle fournit les coordonnées du club d’étudiants;

(b) Elle fournit les noms, numéros d’étudiant et adresses de courriel de 15 étudiants actuellement inscrits à l’Université 91��ɫ qui sont membres du club d’étudiants. À tout moment, le SCLD peut exiger du club d’étudiants qu’il produise une liste de 15 étudiants actuellement inscrits à l’Université 91��ɫ que le SCLD contactera pour leur demander d’attester qu’ils sont des membres actifs du club d’étudiants;

(c) Elle confirme que les dirigeants du club d’étudiants et 80 % des membres du club d’étudiants sont des étudiants actuellement inscrits à l’Université 91��ɫ. Étant donné que la taille des départements universitaires varie, il n’y a pas de nombre minimal de membres requis pour un club d’étudiants universitaire; étant entendu toutefois que chaque club d’étudiants est toujours tenu de soumettre une liste de ses membres;

(d) Elle identifie les membres du club d’étudiants qui ne sont pas des étudiants inscrits à l’Université 91��ɫ. Les anciens de 91��ɫ sont considérés comme n’étant pas inscrits à l’Université 91��ɫ aux fins de cette exigence et le club d’étudiants doit confirmer que ses membres non inscrits à l’Université 91��ɫ sont des membres sans droit de vote;

(e) Elle précise les affiliations à un département, à un collège ou à une faculté;

(f) Elle confirme qu’il y a deux signataires autorisés et indique les coordonnées personnelles de chacun d’eux. Les signataires autorisés doivent être des étudiants actuellement inscrits à l’Université 91��ɫ tout au long de leur mandat à titre de signataires autorisés. L’inobservation de cette exigence entraîne l’annulation automatique de la reconnaissance du club d’étudiants. Le rétablissement de la reconnaissance est à la discrétion du SCLD. Aucun étudiant ne peut être un signataire autorisé de plusieurs clubs d’étudiants simultanément. Cela n’empêche pas un étudiant qui est signataire autorisé d’un club d’étudiants d’être en même temps un dirigeant d’un autre club d’étudiants, pourvu qu’il n’ait pas de pouvoir de signature dans les deux fonctions;

(g) Elle fournit les documents constitutifs à jour du club d’étudiants, même s’ils ont été fournis au cours des années précédentes;

(h) Pour un renouvellement de la reconnaissance du club d’étudiants, elle fournit une copie du procès-verbal de la dernière assemblée électorale confirmant qu’il existe une procédure démocratique pour le changement de direction et la ratification des nouveaux dirigeants;

(i) Également pour un renouvellement de la reconnaissance du club d’étudiants, elle fournit une copie du dernier relevé bancaire du club d’étudiants s’il a un compte bancaire;

(j) Elle fournit l’accord signé des signataires visant à veiller à ce que le club d’étudiants se conforme à la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965, à la législation de l’Université, au présent règlement et à ses documents constitutifs; et

(k) Le club d’étudiants doit également ���𳦴DzԲԲ�î�ٰ��� que l’Université 91��ɫ n’assure pas ni n’indemnise le club d’étudiants, ses membres ou les tiers avec qui le club d’étudiants interagit.

7.4.�� Si quelque élément d’information fourni dans la demande de reconnaissance du club d’étudiants est insuffisant, le club d’étudiants est alors prié de fournir de plus amples détails au SCLD.

7.5�� Le SCLD se réserve le droit de refuser la demande de reconnaissance d’un club d’étudiants pour un ou plusieurs motifs, notamment :

(a) Il ne satisfait pas aux exigences du présent règlement;

(b) Dans le cas d’un club d’étudiants qui est une association non constituée en personne morale, il n’a pas une constitution conforme à l’annexe C ou, dans le cas d’un club d’étudiants qui est constitué en personne morale, fusionné ou maintenu en vertu de la LPM, de la LOSBL ou d’une législation analogue, tout aspect des documents constitutifs qui n’est pas prescrit par la législation (notamment l’objet ou les processus de gouvernance du club d’étudiants) est incompatible avec les principes directeurs selon lesquelles les activités des organisations étudiantes et leur financement des activités étudiantes doivent être menés de manière ouverte, accessible, démocratique, non discriminatoire et responsable sur le plan juridique et financier;

(c) Les objectifs du club d’étudiants semblent tellement similaires aux objectifs ou à la programmation d’un club d’étudiants ou d’un département de l’Université existant que, de l’avis du gestionnaire de la vie étudiante (Manager, 91��ɫ), du SCLD, il n’y aurait pas de différenciation suffisante entre le club d’étudiants projeté et celui qui existe déjà;

(d) Le directeur/la directrice de l’engagement étudiant (Director, Student Engagement) a un motif raisonnable de conclure que le club d’étudiants projeté��:

i) cherche à obtenir la reconnaissance afin d’éviter l’effet d’une suspension ou d’une autre mesure disciplinaire ou sanction imposée à un autre club d’étudiants dont les objectifs ou la composition des membres sont similaires; ou

ii) agirait à titre de mandataire ou d’intermédiaire pour un groupe, un organisme ou un tiers externe à l’Université afin d’accroître sa clientèle ou de promouvoir son entreprise ou sa cause.

7.6�� Tous les clubs d’étudiants universitaires qui se consacrent à un intérêt ou à une activité pour le groupe représenté d’une association étudiante de faculté en particulier doivent être affiliés au programme universitaire ou à la faculté principale applicable de l’Université. Lorsqu’ils demandent la reconnaissance, les clubs d’étudiants universitaires doivent obtenir l’approbation préalable du département ou de la faculté universitaire applicable avant de procéder à l’inscription.

7.7 Tous les clubs d’étudiants confessionnels et religieux doivent être membres du Conseil interconfessionnel des étudiants de l’Université 91��ɫ. La reconnaissance des clubs d’étudiants confessionnels et religieux ne repose pas sur des principes de foi ou des croyances fondamentales, mais plutôt sur la volonté de se conformer aux exigences du Conseil interconfessionnel, notamment les Trois Piliers de la Tolérance, et sur la question de savoir s’il existe actuellement des clubs similaires à l’Université.

7.8 Tous les clubs d’étudiants axés sur le sport doivent suivre une procédure d’examen supplémentaire menée par le département d’athlétisme et des loisirs pour déterminer les précautions à prendre et la documentation nécessaire pour la reconnaissance du club d’étudiants.

7.9�� Si la reconnaissance est refusée, le club d’étudiants peut en appeler de cette décision en remettant au SCLD une déclaration écrite expliquant les raisons pour lesquelles il estime que les motifs du refus sont injustifiés : par exemple, il a satisfait aux présentes règles, ses objectifs sont uniques, sa composition prévue est distincte et il peut différencier ses objectifs ou sa programmation de ceux d’un club d’étudiants ou d’un département universitaire existant. L’appel est examiné par le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, qui rend sa décision finale quant au maintien du refus de la reconnaissance ou quant au fait que le club d’étudiants peut être reconnu.

7.10�� Si la reconnaissance est accordée, les dirigeants et signataires autorisés du club d’étudiants doivent suivre la séance d’orientation 101 des clubs d’étudiants offerte pendant la période d’inscription aux clubs d’étudiants alors en cours. La dernière séance d’orientation 101 des clubs d’étudiants a lieu après la date limite de présentation d’une demande de club d’étudiants afin que les candidats de dernière minute aient la possibilité d’assister à la séance. Le défaut de remplir cette exigence entraîne l’annulation de la reconnaissance sans possibilité de recourir aux procédures prévues aux articles 11 à 13 du présent règlement et malgré celles-ci.

7.11 Si la reconnaissance est accordée, les dirigeants et signataires autorisés du club d’étudiants doivent également suivre des modules de formation sur l’utilisation de ressources supplémentaires à l’Université. Le défaut de remplir cette exigence entraîne l’annulation de la reconnaissance sans possibilité de recourir aux procédures prévues aux articles 11 à 13 du présent règlement et malgré celles-ci.

7.12 La reconnaissance des clubs d’étudiants expire le 30 septembre de chaque année. Les clubs d’étudiants reconnus sont tenus de renouveler chaque année leur reconnaissance au plus tard le deuxième mardi d’octobre en suivant la procédure prévue à l’article 7.3 dans l’année qui suit la date à laquelle leur reconnaissance a été accordée ou renouvelée pour la dernière fois, sous réserve de toute prolongation de ce délai par le SCLD. Si un club d’étudiants omet de demander un renouvellement de la reconnaissance dans le délai imparti, tous les privilèges accordés au club d’étudiants, y compris sa page YU Connect, son compte de courriel et son site Web, sont considérés comme inactifs et peuvent être désactivés par l’Université.

7.13 Les clubs d’étudiants ne peuvent pas utiliser la désignation « 91��ɫ », « 91��ɫ » ou « Université 91��ɫ » dans leur nom officiel, de manière à suggérer qu'ils font partie de l'Université mais peuvent indiquer que le club d’étudiants est « à 91��ɫ » (p. ex. « Club d’échec à 91��ɫ », mais non « Club d’échec de 91��ɫ »). Les exceptions à cette exigence sont assujetties au consentement écrit préalable de l’Université 91��ɫ conformément à la politique et aux lignes directrices en matière de gestion de la marque (Brand Stewardship Policy and Guidelines).

7.14���� Le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes publie chaque année une liste des clubs d’étudiants reconnus.

8. Privilèges des organisations étudiantes reconnues

8.1 Sous réserve du respect du présent règlement, de la disponibilité et d’ententes applicables avec l’Université, l’Université peut, à son appréciation, accorder aux organisations étudiantes reconnues, conformément à la législation et à la législation de l’Université, tout ou partie des privilèges suivants :

(a) utiliser le système de vote électronique de l’Université pour les associations étudiantes reconnues;

(b) percevoir des cotisations d’étudiants conformément à l’article 9;

(c) obtenir des subventions ou des dons en nature ou en argent de l’Université;

(d) avoir des adresses de courriel et URL de site Web hébergées par l’Université;

(e) avoir des locaux de bureaux à l’Université;

(f) utiliser des locaux et des installations de l’Université, y compris des espaces de tables;

(g) utiliser la technologie des salles de classe de l’Université;

(h) obtenir les coordonnées des membres aux fins de communication électronique directe, sous réserve d’une convention de confidentialité selon le modèle établi par le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes; et

(i) obtenir un soutien coordonné par l’entremise du vice-recteur/de la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes ou son remplaçant désigné, notamment du soutien pour la formation, les ressources, l’orientation et les événements.

9. Cotisations pour les organisations étudiantes reconnues

9.1�� Une organisation étudiante reconnue peut demander l’établissement, la modification ou l’annulation d’une cotisation auprès de ses membres, comme suit :

Étape 1�� Remettre au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes une preuve d’activités depuis au moins deux années universitaires et un avis de son intention de demander l’établissement, la modification ou l’annulation d’une cotisation.

Étape 2�� Rencontrer le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes ou son remplaçant désigné pour recevoir des directives et des lignes directrices concernant l’exécution des étapes 3 et 4 ci‑après.

Étape 3 Obtenir, au moyen d’une pétition, le consentement d’au moins 10��% de ses membres et en soumettre les résultats au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes. Dès réception des résultats de la pétition, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si la pétition a été dûment exécutée conformément aux directives et aux lignes directrices données à l’étape 2 et si elle est, par conséquent, valide. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que la pétition est invalide, il/elle peut demander que la pétition soit refaite ou mettre fin au processus. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que la pétition est valide, il/elle invitera les étudiants à passer à l’étape 4.

Étape 4�� Tenir, conformément aux lignes directrices et procédures pour la tenue de référendums étudiants à l’Université 91��ɫ (Guidelines and Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda at 91��ɫ) et au moyen du système de vote électronique de l’Université ou d’un système sûr analogue approuvé au préalable par écrit par le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes, un référendum auprès des étudiants qui seraient assujettis à la cotisation proposée et en soumettre les résultats au vice-recteur/à la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes. À la réception des résultats du référendum, le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine si le référendum a été dûment tenu conformément aux procédures pour la tenue de référendums étudiants (Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda) et s’il est, par conséquent, valide. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le référendum n’est pas valide, il/elle peut demander la tenue d’un nouveau référendum ou mettre fin au processus. Si le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes détermine que le référendum est valide, il/elle recommande l’établissement, la modification ou l’annulation de la cotisation, selon le cas, au recteur. Le recteur/la rectrice soumet normalement la recommandation à l’approbation du conseil des gouverneurs.

9.2�� Les organisations étudiantes qui n’ont pas de financement par cotisations peuvent néanmoins demander à leurs membres des frais d’adhésion modestes et/ou des frais raisonnables de recouvrement des coûts pour financer leurs activités. L’information sur les frais d’adhésion et les avantages associés à l’adhésion doit être rendue publique.

10. Obligations des organisations étudiantes reconnues

10.1 ���� L’organisation étudiante reconnue doit :

a) se conduire de manière ouverte, accessible, démocratique, non discriminatoire et responsable sur le plan juridique et financier, notamment quant à sa création, à son fonctionnement, à son financement et à ses affaires financières;

b) dans le cas des organisations étudiantes dont l’adhésion est obligatoire ou qui perçoivent une cotisation, tenir des élections au moins une fois par année universitaire; ces élections doivent être tenues au moyen du système de vote électronique de l’Université ou d’un système sûr comparable à l’égard duquel le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes a donné son approbation préalable écrite.��Il est entendu que le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes ne peut approuver que des systèmes de vote électronique dont la sécurité est comparable ou supérieure à celle du système de vote électronique de l’Université;

c) soumettre à l’Université, au plus tard le 1^er juillet de chaque année, ou de temps à autre à la demande de l’Université, dans le format et à la date que l’Université peut exiger de temps à autre, les documents suivants, que l’Université rend��publics��:

i) une liste à jour des noms, titres et adresses courriel de chaque dirigeant, y compris le trésorier ou l’équivalent;

ii) une liste à jour des noms, titres et adresses courriel de chaque dirigeant qui est un signataire autorisé;

iii) un exemplaire de ses documents constitutifs les plus à jour;

iv) un exemplaire de ses états financiers pour l’exercice précédent (du 1^er mai au 30 avril). Dans le cas d’une organisation étudiante dont l’adhésion est obligatoire ou qui perçoit une cotisation, lorsque le revenu brut pour l’exercice excède 40 000 $ (cotisations et autres revenus), l’organisation étudiante doit fournir des états financiers audités par un auditeur agréé. Dans le cas d’une organisation étudiante dont les états financiers indiquent un revenu brut pour l’exercice de 40��000��$ ou moins (cotisations et autres revenus), l’organisation étudiante doit fournir un rapport de mission d’examen établi par un expert-comptable autorisé. Un club d’étudiants qui ne perçoit pas de cotisations est dispensé de cette obligation, mais doit fournir une copie de ses derniers relevés bancaires;

v) un document signé par chaque dirigeant reconnaissant l’obligation de l’organisation de se conformer à l’ensemble de la législation de l’Université; et

vi) tout document ou renseignement supplémentaire que l’Université juge, à sa seule appréciation, nécessaire pour vérifier la conformité au règlement et à la législation de l’Université;

d) demander et obtenir l’approbation du vice-recteur/de la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes ou de son remplaçant désigné avant la constitution en personne morale, la fusion ou le maintien en vertu de la LPM, de la LOSBL ou de la législation analogue, afin que l’Université 91��ɫ puisse veiller à ce que tout aspect des documents constitutifs qui n’est pas prescrit par la législation (notamment l’objet ou les processus de gouvernance de l’organisation étudiante) soit conforme aux principes d’ouverture, d’accessibilité, de démocratie, de non-discrimination et de responsabilité sur le plan juridique et financier énoncés dans le présent règlement;

e) aviser le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes ou son remplaçant désigné dans les 14��jours suivant tout changement dans ses documents constitutifs et tout changement de ses dirigeants, y compris les dirigeants qui sont des signataires autorisés;

f) s’abstenir d’affecter ses fonds à des fins incompatibles avec la mission, l’objet ou les documents constitutifs de l’organisation étudiante;

g) s’abstenir d’exercer des activités essentiellement de nature commerciale, comme��:

i) fournir des biens et/ou des services dans un but lucratif, ou

ii) exercer une activité ou une fonction pour le compte d’une organisation commerciale tierce qui offre des biens ou des services promotionnels, mais qui ne commandite pas directement des activités qui correspondent à la mission fondamentale de l’organisation étudiante; et

h) adopter et respecter des politiques et des procédures visant à régler les conflits d’intérêts réels, potentiels ou apparents, y compris en ce qui a trait à l’attribution de contrats, au versement de paiements ou à la fourniture d’autres avantages à des dirigeants, à des employés, à des membres ou à des personnes qui sont reliées par des liens personnels, notamment familiaux et matrimoniaux, à un dirigeant, à un employé ou à un membre, et à l’acceptation de cadeaux par ces personnes.

11. Non-conformité des organisations étudiantes reconnues

11.1 ������ Les organisations étudiantes reconnues qui ne se conforment pas à quelque partie du présent règlement sont passibles de sanctions.

11.2 ������ Lorsque l’Université a des raisons de croire qu’une organisation étudiante reconnue��:

a) n’a pas ou peut ne pas avoir exercé ses activités de manière ouverte, accessible, démocratique, non discriminatoire et responsable sur le plan juridique et financier; ou

b) contrevient à une entente conclue avec l’Université;

l’Université peut aviser par écrit l’organisation étudiante de tout manquement présumé par l’intermédiaire du centre de la communauté étudiante et du développement du leadership (Centre for Student Community Leadership Development («��SCLD��»)). L’Université peut suspendre les autres procédures prévues par le présent règlement jusqu’à ce que le processus interne de plainte de l’organisation étudiante soit épuisé ou jusqu’à ce qu’un délai raisonnable à cet effet se soit écoulé, sauf dans des circonstances exceptionnelles.

11.3�������� Le centre de la communauté étudiante et du développement du leadership (Centre for Student Community Leadership Development («��SCLD��»)) prépare l’avis écrit en cas de manquement présumé par une organisation étudiante reconnue. L’avis comprend les renseignements suivants��:

a) la nature du manquement présumé;

b) les mesures que l’organisation étudiante doit prendre, soit pour démontrer qu’il n’y a pas eu manquement soit pour remédier au manquement;

c) la date à laquelle les mesures prévues en b) doivent être respectées;

d) les modalités des mesures provisoires, telles que la suspension ou le retrait de privilèges, que le représentant juge appropriées, les motifs de ces mesures provisoires et la date à laquelle elles prennent effet;

e) la date à laquelle l’organisation étudiante doit remettre ses observations en réponse aux mesures provisoires imposées, et les exigences relatives au format de celles-ci;

f) les conséquences potentielles du non-respect des obligations prévues à l’alinéa b) au plus tard à la date prévue à l’alinéa c), qui peuvent comprendre des sanctions jusqu’à ce tout soit conforme; et

g) une mention selon laquelle le manquement présumé fera l’objet d’une audience par écrit ou par comparution, d’après l’évaluation faite par le représentant de la complexité du manquement présumé et de la gravité des conséquences potentielles.

11.4 ������ Le représentant tient une audience par écrit ou par comparution conformément aux principes d’équité procédurale avant de décider si l’organisation étudiante reconnue a manqué ou non au présent règlement et/ou si ce manquement se poursuit ou non. L’audience est menée par un représentant qui n’a pas participé à l’enquête sur le manquement présumé, ni à la préparation et à la remise d’un avis écrit à cet effet.

11.5 ������ Dans le cadre de l’audience, le représentant peut consulter les membres de la Student Representative Roundtable ou d’autres organisations étudiantes selon ce qu’il estime approprié. Ces consultations sont strictement confidentielles.

11.6 ������ Le représentant rend sa décision qui comprend les motifs écrits pour lesquels il statue que l’organisation étudiante reconnue a manqué ou non au présent règlement et/ou si ce manquement se poursuit ou non.

11.7�������� À tout moment avant sa décision, le représentant peut proposer d’autres modes de règlement des différends selon les modalités qu’il juge appropriées eu égard à la nature du manquement présumé.

12. Sanctions applicables aux organisations étudiantes reconnues

12.1�������� Si le représentant statue qu’une organisation étudiante reconnue manque ou continue de manquer au présent règlement, il lui accorde un délai de 7 jours à compter de la date de sa décision pour lui remettre des observations écrites sur les sanctions si l’organisation étudiante le souhaite.

12.2�������� Pour établir une sanction proportionnelle au manquement, le représentant examine d’abord les observations écrites sur les sanctions de l’organisation étudiante reconnue et les circonstances atténuantes et aggravantes.

12.3�������� Les sanctions imposées à l’organisation étudiante reconnue peuvent comprendre une ou plusieurs des sanctions suivantes��:

a) la suspension ou la révocation d’un ou de plusieurs privilèges, sauf comme il est déjà prévu aux alinéas c) à e) ci-dessous;

b) l’obligation de participer à un processus de réparation ou d’éducation;

c) la suspension, en totalité ou en partie, pour une période raisonnable, du transfert des cotisations à l’organisation étudiante aux conditions que le représentant juge appropriées, au terme de laquelle l’Université peut décider, à sa discrétion, soit de procéder au transfert des cotisations à l’organisation étudiante, soit de rembourser les cotisations aux étudiants qui les ont payées;

d) la fin de la perception des cotisations; et

e) le retrait de la reconnaissance de l’organisation étudiante.

12.4�������� Le représentant publie sa décision qui comprend des motifs écrits justifiant sa décision en matière de sanctions.

12.5 ������ La sanction prévue à l’alinéa 12.3c) prend effet immédiatement à titre provisoire sous réserve de l’approbation du conseil des gouverneurs après que le processus de révision prévu à l’article 13 du présent règlement soit épuisé. Si le conseil n’approuve pas les sanctions, l’Université doit, dans les meilleurs délais, prendre les dispositions nécessaires pour comptabiliser et transférer les cotisations à l’organisation étudiante reconnue.

12.6 ������ Dans tous les cas où la sanction prévue aux alinéas 12.3d) ou 12.3e) est imposée et entraîne la fin de la perception des cotisations, la sanction ne prend effet que si elle est approuvée par le conseil des gouverneurs après que le processus de révision prévu à l’article 13 du présent règlement soit épuisé.

12.7�������� L’inobservation continue après la détermination d’un manquement au présent règlement, ou l’inobservation des sanctions imposées, peut donner lieu à un avis de manquement présumé subséquent et peut également constituer un facteur aggravant pris en considération pour déterminer les sanctions en cas de manquement ultérieur.

13. Procédure de révision des décisions concernant un manquement et une sanction

13.1�������� Une organisation étudiante reconnue dont on a jugé qu’elle a manqué au présent règlement ou qui a été sanctionnée pour ce manquement en vertu des articles 11 et 12 peut demander la révision de cette décision pour des motifs de compétence, de partialité ou d’autres irrégularités de procédure. La révision est effectuée par le bureau de l’Université dont relève le représentant, par d’autres personnes que le représentant qui n’ont pas participé à l’enquête sur le manquement présumé ou à l’établissement et à la remise d’un avis écrit à cet effet (le «��bureau de révision��»).

13.2 ������ Sauf dans les circonstances décrites à l’article 13.4, une organisation étudiante reconnue peut demander la révision conformément à l’article 13.1 en présentant une demande écrite de révision au bureau de révision, avec copie au représentant, dans les 7 jours qui suivent la date de la communication de la décision à l’organisation étudiante en vertu de l’article 11.6 ou de l’article 12.4. La demande de révision écrite comprend��: les motifs de la demande de révision et la preuve à l’appui de la demande de révision. Le représentant remet sans délai une copie de la documentation dans ses dossiers au bureau de révision.

13.3�������� Le bureau de révision communique, dans les meilleurs délais et dans tous les cas au plus tard 21 jours après la présentation de la demande de révision, le nom du responsable de la révision à l’organisation étudiante reconnue, ainsi qu’un projet de calendrier pour la révision. La décision relative à la révision du bureau de révision est communiquée par écrit à l’organisation étudiante dans les meilleurs délais et dans tous les cas au plus tard 60 jours après la présentation de la demande de��révision.

13.4�������� Lorsque le représentant est le recteur/la rectrice ou son remplaçant désigné, une organisation étudiante peut demander la révision de la décision en soumettant une demande de révision écrite au président/à la présidente, avec copie au recteur/à la rectrice ou à son remplaçant désigné, dans les 7 jours qui suivent la date de la communication de la décision à l’organisation étudiante en vertu des articles 11.6 ou 12.4. La demande de révision écrite comprend��: les motifs de la demande de révision et la preuve à l’appui de la demande de��révision. Le représentant remet sans délai une copie de la documentation dans ses dossiers au président/à la présidente.

13.5�������� Dans le cas d’une révision demandée en vertu de l’article 13.4, le président/la présidente peut��:

a) mener personnellement la révision, auquel cas la décision du président/de la présidente relative à la révision est communiquée par écrit à l’organisation étudiante dans les meilleurs délais et dans tous les cas au plus tard 60 jours après la présentation de la demande de révision;

ou

b) ordonner que la révision soit menée par un responsable de la révision indépendant et communiquée sans délai à l’organisation étudiante. Le président/la présidente nomme le responsable de la révision indépendant dans les meilleurs délais et dans tous les cas au plus tard 21 jours après la présentation de la demande de révision et communique sans délai le nom du responsable de la révision à l’organisation étudiante avec un calendrier pour la révision. Le responsable de la révision indépendant soumet des recommandations au président/à la présidente. La décision du président/de la présidente est fondée sur les recommandations du responsable de la révision indépendant et est communiquée par écrit à l’organisation étudiante dans les meilleurs délais et dans tous les cas au plus tard 60 jours après la nomination du responsable de la révision indépendant.

13.6 ������ Le bureau de révision peut confirmer, modifier ou annuler la décision du��représentant.

13.7 ������ La décision du bureau de révision relative à la révision d’une décision en vertu du présent règlement est définitive, sous réserve de l’approbation requise du conseil des gouverneurs prévue aux articles 12.5 et 12.6.

14. Révision du présent règlement

14.1�������� Le présent règlement est révisé au moins une fois tous les cinq ans après sa date d’entrée en vigueur. De plus, les articles du présent règlement qui portent sur la reconnaissance de nouvelles organisations étudiantes seront également révisés au moment opportun après l’ouverture du nouveau campus Markham multifacultés, permettant ainsi aux étudiants de ce campus nouvellement créé et aux autres associations étudiantes concernées de présenter des commentaires et suggestions.

14.2 ������ Le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes lance et supervise le processus de révision qui comprend des consultations avec des étudiants, des représentants d’organisations étudiantes, des membres du corps professoral, du personnel et d’autres membres de la collectivité.

15. Entrée en vigueur

15.1�������� Le présent règlement entre pleinement en vigueur le 1^er janvier 2023.

16. Titre abrégé

16.1�������� Le présent règlement peut être cité sous le titre ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes.

ANNEXE A

au ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes

��Associations étudiantes de faculté reconnues

Creative Arts Students Association

Environmental and Urban Change Students’ Association

Faculty of Education Students' Association

Faculty of Health Student Caucus

Graduate Business Council

Lassonde Student Government

Legal and Literary Society of Osgoode Hall Law School

Student Council of Liberal Arts & Professional Studies

Undergraduate Business Society

ANNEXE B

au ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes

Associations étudiantes de collège reconnues

Bethune College Council

Calumet College Council

Founders College Student Council

Association étudiante du Collège Glendon

Markham Student Council

McLaughlin College Council

New College Council

Stong College Student Government

Vanier College Council

Winters College Council

ANNEXE C

au ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes

Exigences relatives à la constitution des organisations étudiantes reconnues non constituées en personne morale

Le ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes promeut les buts et objectifs de la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965 et la liberté des étudiants de s’associer et de s’exprimer par l’intermédiaire d’organisations étudiantes en exigeant que les organisations étudiantes reconnues mènent leurs activités et leur financement des activités étudiantes de manière ouverte, accessible, démocratique, non discriminatoire, et responsable sur le plan juridique et financier. L’intérêt que porte l’Université 91��ɫ à la constitution d’organisations étudiantes reconnues s’inspire de ce principe directeur. Ainsi, à titre de condition à sa reconnaissance, une organisation étudiante qui est une association non constituée en personne morale doit élaborer et maintenir en permanence une constitution qui est approuvée par une majorité de ses membres et qui respecte les exigences ci-dessous. Les organisations étudiantes qui sont constituées en personne morale, fusionnées ou maintenues en vertu de la LPM, de la LOSBL ou d’une législation analogue ne sont pas tenues d’avoir une telle constitution puisque les dispositions de ces lois et de leurs règlements d’application, et les documents constitutifs qui sont requis aux termes de ces lois et règlements, prévoient déjà en général que l’organisation étudiante doit mener ses activités et son financement des activités étudiantes conformément à ce principe directeur.

1. Interprétation��: La constitution doit décrire l’organe décisionnel dont l’interprétation fait autorité. Exemple��: Le Conseil de_____________ est la seule autorité pour l’interprétation de la constitution. Toutefois, le conseil prend toutes les décisions en matière d’interprétation compte dûment tenu des règles de procédure reconnues, p.��ex. Roberts Rules of Order. Le président/la présidente de l’organisation, sous réserve d’un appel au conseil, est généralement la première source d’interprétation de la constitution.
2. Objets��: La constitution doit énoncer clairement l’objet de l’organisation étudiante et celui-ci doit correspondre à l’objet énoncé dans les documents constitutifs si l’organisation étudiante est constituée en personne morale. Cet énoncé de l’objet doit être conforme à l’ensemble de la réglementation, des politiques, des procédures et des lignes directrices de l’Université et de la législation fédérale et provinciale, y compris le Code des droits de la personne de l’Ontario. En cas d’incompatibilité, l’organisation étudiante sera non conforme au présent règlement jusqu’à ce que l’incompatibilité soit��corrigée.
3. Pouvoirs��: La constitution doit énoncer clairement les pouvoirs accordés à l’organisation, à ses membres et à ses représentants élus, c’est-à-dire les membres du conseil (ou le conseil d’administration, selon le cas), les membres de la direction et les membres des comités permanents, le cas échéant. Ces pouvoirs doivent être exercés d’une manière conforme à l’objet publié de l’organisation étudiante.
4. Adhésion-groupe représenté��: La constitution doit définir clairement le groupe représenté et les critères d’adhésion.
5. Critères d’admissibilité à titre de membre du conseil, de la direction et des comités permanents��: La constitution doit définir clairement les critères d’admissibilité au conseil, à la direction et aux comités permanents. Ces critères doivent comprendre��: a) les qualités requises pour être membre; b) la durée maximale du mandat; c) les procédures à suivre en cas de vacance de poste; et d) les responsabilités et privilèges associés à la qualité de membre. Ces critères doivent être conformes au Code des droits de la personne de l’Ontario. Lorsqu’un salaire est versé par l’organisation étudiante, une description du poste rémunéré est requise (voir 15, ci‑après). Des définitions de membres de plein droit et de membres associés doivent être incluses, s’il y a lieu. (Exemple��: «��Les membres votants du conseil sont��: le président/la présidente, le vice-président/la vice-présidente des finances, ...��».)
6. Obligations des membres��: La constitution doit décrire clairement les obligations de tous les membres du conseil et/ou des représentants élus. Des descriptions de poste doivent également être incluses. (Se reporter à l’article 11 ci-dessous). (Exemple��: Les fonctions du président/de la présidente sont ..., celles du secrétaire sont ..., celles des sénateurs sont ..., etc.)
7. Membre associé��: La constitution peut et doit, dans le cas d’une association étudiante centrale, prévoir la qualité de membre associé pour les catégories d’organisations étudiantes reconnues qui sont bénéficiaires de certaines de ses activités, mais qui ne peuvent pas participer à ses affaires en raison du lieu de leurs études ou d’autres conditions particulières.
8. Conflit d’intérêts��: Conformément à l’alinéa 10.1h) du présent règlement, la constitution doit traiter de la question des conflits d’intérêts pour les membres de la direction, du conseil, des comités permanents et/ou les membres de conseils de gestion/conseils consultatifs (se reporter à l’article 17 ci-dessous).
9. Procédures électorales��: La constitution doit prévoir des procédures électorales annuelles permettant de pourvoir les postes, et des procédures à suivre en cas de vacance aux postes de la direction. Ces procédures doivent clairement��: a) attribuer la responsabilité de convoquer des élections; b) prévoir l’annonce des élections de manière à ce que les membres aient amplement l’occasion d’y participer; c) prévoir l’utilisation du système de vote électronique de l’Université ou d’un système sûr analogue à l’égard duquel le vice-recteur/la vice-rectrice aux affaires étudiantes a donné son approbation préalable écrite, et d) nommer un directeur général/une directrice générale des élections ayant reçu une formation à ce poste et chargé(e) d’approuver les résultats des élections et soit de remettre en question les procédures et/ou les résultats des élections, soit d’examiner et de régler toute contestation de ces procédures et/ou résultats. Une description de poste du directeur général /de la directrice générale des élections doit également être fournie et communiquée aux membres. Des descriptions des procédures de mise en candidature, des définitions de l’admissibilité au vote, de l’éligibilité aux postes à pourvoir, des lignes directrices de campagne (dépenses) et des procédures de scrutin et de vote doivent également être énoncées.
10. Procédures du conseil��: La constitution doit prévoir des dispositions pour les procédures du conseil suivantes��: a) la fréquence des réunions; b) la personne chargée de convoquer et de présider des réunions et d’établir l’ordre du jour; c) le mode de convocation aux réunions��: d) le délai d’avis de convocation aux réunions; e) les personnes habiles à voter aux réunions; f) la procédure de vote par procuration (si elle est souhaitée); g) la procédure à suivre en cas de partage des voix; et h) les exigences en matière de quorum pour toutes les délibérations, y compris, notamment les réunions du conseil et les réunions des dirigeants élus.
11. Responsabilité financière��: La constitution doit faire preuve de responsabilité financière en indiquant��: a) la période de l’exercice; b) les postes avec un pouvoir de signature; c) la personne responsable du budget; d) les étapes requises avant l’approbation du budget; e) le pourcentage de voix nécessaire pour approuver le budget; f) la personne responsable de la tenue des dossiers financiers de l’organisation; g) la personne responsable de l’établissement des rapports financiers et de leur communication aux membres; et h) et la personne responsable de la communication de l’information financière à l’Université. La constitution doit également prévoir le traitement des fonds ou des dettes résiduels d’une organisation étudiante qui ne prévoit pas son maintien au-delà de la fin de l’année en cours.
12. Comités��: La constitution doit créer et décrire tous les comités permanents, y compris��: a) leur mandat; b) les personnes qui peuvent y siéger et y voter; c) les membres d’office; d) les exigences en matière de quorum; e) les responsabilités; et f) les exigences en matière de rapports.
13. Procédures de modification��: La constitution doit prévoir des procédures de modification équitables, indiquant les délais d’avis requis pour que les membres présentent des propositions de modification de la constitution et/ou des règlements administratifs; et le quorum, les procédures de vote et les majorités requises pour ces��propositions. La constitution doit permettre à 10% ou plus des étudiants membres concernés de proposer une modification à toute disposition de la constitution (à moins que cela ne soit incompatible avec une autre disposition du présent règlement). Si une telle proposition est faite, elle doit alors être adoptée à une majorité des voix exprimées lors d’une assemblée dûment constituée des membres de l’organisation étudiante.
14. Affiliations externes��: Au besoin, la constitution devrait inclure des descriptions de toute affiliation et/ou relation extraterritoriale. (Exemple��: adhésion à des organisations externes comme la Fédération canadienne des étudiantes et étudiants.)
15. Employés��: La constitution doit inclure des descriptions de poste pour tous les employés de l’organisation ou indiquer par ailleurs où elles sont situées et peuvent être consultées par les membres. Les descriptions doivent indiquer les responsabilités et les conditions d’emploi des employés, ainsi que les personnes chargées de l’embauche, de la supervision et de la discipline des employés.
16. Dépositaire de la constitution��: Chaque organisation étudiante financée doit désigner un «��dépositaire de la constitution��» officiel aux fins de la continuité entre les dirigeants élus et aux fins de l’examen et de la communication en temps opportun de la constitution. S’il y a lieu, un membre de la Division des affaires étudiantes ou du personnel du doyen ou du principal (Dean’s or Head’s staff) pourrait remplir ce rôle. Si l’organisation a des employés permanents, l’un de ses membres du personnel peut être chargé de ce rôle de dépositaire.
17. Conseils consultatifs/conseils de gestion��: Les organisations étudiantes qui possèdent et exploitent de petites entreprises à but non lucratif pour le propre compte, comme des pubs, des cafés, des journaux, des salles de jeux, etc., doivent établir des conseils consultatifs/conseils de gestion chargés de superviser ces activités dans des relations sans lien de dépendance avec les entreprises. Dans la mesure du possible, les conseils consultatifs et conseils de gestion doivent être composés d’étudiants, de membres du personnel, de membres du corps professoral et d’anciens élèves qui peuvent offrir leur expertise et leurs points de vue respectifs à l’organisation étudiante. Les lignes directrices en matière de conflits d’intérêts doivent être respectées au moment de choisir les membres de ces conseils consultatifs/conseils de gestion.
18. Allégations d’actes répréhensibles et mesures disciplinaires��: Outre l’exigence d’un processus interne de traitement des plaintes (se reporter à l’article 19 ci-dessous), la constitution doit prévoir des procédures officielles pour traiter les allégations d’actes répréhensibles à l’encontre d’un membre du conseil, de la direction ou d’un comité permanent. Les dispositions doivent inclure les circonstances susceptibles de dicter des mesures disciplinaires (comme la censure, la suspension ou la destitution) et indiquer la personne responsable d’entendre les allégations et/ou d’imposer des sanctions. Des dispositions relatives au remplacement des dirigeants élus (élections partielles) en cas de vacance de postes doivent également être incluses. Ces audiences doivent être menées de façon équitable, de manière à ce que la partie visée par les allégations ait l’occasion juste et opportune de présenter sa propre défense et à ce que les allégations fassent l’objet d’une enquête ou d’une décision d’un ou de plusieurs étudiants membres impartiaux de l’organisation étudiante.
19. Processus interne de traitement des plaintes��: Les organisations étudiantes doivent adopter et publier sur leur site Web ou autre support numérique un processus interne détaillé et accessible de traitement des plaintes portant sur tout aspect de leur organisation et de ses activités.
20. Accessibilité de la documentation��: Les organisations étudiantes doivent publier leurs dates de réunions, ordres du jour, requêtes, procès-verbaux de réunions, documents constitutifs, budgets et états financiers de manière à ce que leurs membres puissent aisément les consulter (p. ex., site Web, comptes de médias sociaux publics, page YU Connect).

ANNEXE D

au ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes

Caractéristiques des principes

1. Ouvert, accessible et démocratique

L’ouverture, l’accessibilité et la démocratie sont des idéaux largement acceptés qui s’appliquent à de nombreuses organisations communautaires. Il n’existe pas de définition unique de ce qui constitue une organisation ouverte, accessible ou démocratique. Ces termes sont interreliés, ils ont un sens en fonction du contexte et peuvent varier selon la taille, la portée et le mandat d’une organisation. Ils peuvent évoluer à mesure que les organisations et les attentes de leurs membres changent. Pour qu’une organisation étudiante soit considérée comme ouverte, accessible et démocratique, les caractéristiques suivantes s’appliquent généralement.

Les critères énumérés ci-après ne sont pas absolus, puisqu’ils visent à décrire des normes générales selon lesquelles les organisations étudiantes, qui vont des plus petites aux plus grandes en termes de taille et de budget, devraient agir. Le présent règlement reconnaît que les organisations choisiront différents moyens d’agir selon les principes d’ouverture, d’accessibilité et de démocratie, et qu’il faut s’attendre à ce que des différences soient observées dans l’application de ces principes.

Les organisations étudiantes accessibles présentent bon nombre des caractéristiques suivantes��:

• Volonté et désir manifeste d’intégrer de nouveaux membres dans le groupe et dans des activités qui témoignent de cette volonté et de ce désir.
• Dans le cas des groupes de bénévoles, un environnement qui rejoint et accueille les nouveaux membres, avec des critères d’adhésion clairement définis et accessibles au��public.
• Engagement à encourager et promouvoir la participation de tous les membres à l’ensemble des activités de l’organisation et réellement encourager et promouvoir cette participation.
• Transparence quant à ce que sont les activités.
• Ouverture à faire l’objet d’un examen rigoureux.
• Engagement à respecter les principes de diversité, d’équité et d’inclusion envers tous les membres, et agir et communiquer conformément à ces principes envers tous les membres.
• Engagement envers la clarté des communications et veiller à cette dernière.
• Engagement envers la diversité de points de vue et permettre et promouvoir cette diversité.
• Processus équitables permettant aux membres de proposer des changements.

Les organisations étudiantes ��é���dz������پ���ܱ�� présentent bon nombre des caractéristiques suivantes��:

• Ouverture à ce que les membres participent à toutes les activités.
• Des voies de communication efficaces et clairement définies entre les membres et les dirigeants.
• Transparence et responsabilité envers les membres, y compris, notamment en ce qui concerne l’établissement du budget et les dépenses.
• Gestion transparente.
• Engagement à prendre en compte et à respecter les diverses opinions des membres qu’elles soient majoritaires ou minoritaires et réellement prendre en compte et respecter ces opinions.
• Engagement à veiller à ce que les personnes touchées par les décisions aient réellement voix dans les processus conduisant aux décisions.
• Moyens d’examiner la dissidence et les plaintes et d’y donner suite et, s’il y a lieu, de les déférer aux échelons supérieurs de l’organisation.
• Possibilité pour tous les membres de se porter candidats aux postes de direction.
• Des processus électoraux impartiaux et équitables qui permettent aux membres de participer facilement en tant qu’électeurs et candidats, y compris la nomination d’un directeur général des élections indépendant.

Les organisations étudiantes ouvertes présentent bon nombre des caractéristiques suivantes��:

• Information largement disponible sur les activités, la composition, les finances et le mandat de l’organisation.
• Transparence quant aux règles d’exploitation.
• Disposition à partager librement de l’information sur l’organisation avec les membres.
• Critères d’adhésion clairs et transparents.
• Engagement à veiller à ce que les réunions, événements et activités de l’organisation soient communiqués aux membres de manière à ce que les membres puissent y participer pleinement.
• Engagement à veiller à ce que les voix et les points de vue des membres, qu’ils soient exprimés individuellement ou collectivement, puissent être entendus, et, s’il y a lieu, leur donner suite.

2. Non discriminatoire

Non discriminatoire signifie exempt de harcèlement, de préjugés, d’inégalité et de discrimination fondés sur la race, l’ascendance, le lieu d’origine, la couleur, l’origine ethnique, la citoyenneté, la croyance, la religion, le sexe, l’orientation sexuelle, l’identité de genre, l’expression de genre, l’âge, la situation matrimoniale, la situation de famille ou un handicap. Pour être non discriminatoire, une organisation étudiante doit, entre autres choses, traiter tous ses membres sur un pied d’égalité dans le cadre, notamment, de ses activités, de ses décisions internes, de ses déclarations et de ses résolutions.

3. Responsable sur le plan financier (ou financièrement responsable) se caractérise par ce qui suit��:

• Mettre son budget et ses états financiers à la disposition de tous ses membres en tout��temps.
• Affecter ses fonds aux seules fins nécessaires à la réalisation de ses objectifs et conformément à ses documents constitutifs, à la législation de l’Université, y compris aux exigences du présent règlement, et conformément à la législation.
• Se conformer à l’article 11 de l’annexe C.

4. Responsable sur le plan juridique (ou juridiquement responsable) se caractérise par ce qui suit��:

• Se conformer à la législation, à la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965, à la législation de l’Université, au présent règlement, aux documents constitutifs et à toute jurisprudence ou ordonnance applicable d’un tribunal ou d’un tribunal administratif (y compris ceux agissant dans le cadre de la loi intitulée 91��ɫ Act, 1965, de la législation de l’Université et du présent règlement).

The post ��è�����𳾱�Գ� concernant les organisations étudiantes appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

Description:��Regulations regarding Student Organizations, their Activities and Finances.

1. Preamble

1.1���������� The objects and purposes of 91��ɫ under the 91��ɫ Act, 1965, are the advancement of learning, the dissemination of knowledge, the intellectual, spiritual, social, moral and physical development of its members, and the betterment of society. 91��ɫ believes that student organizations play an important role in advancing these purposes. Student organizations promote learning, growth, and civic responsibility among those who conduct and participate in their activities, and thereby serve the interests of their fellow students. As well, student organizations contribute to the educational, recreational, social or cultural quality and diversity of life on campus.

1.2 ���������� The relationship between 91��ɫ and student organizations is governed by the principle that their activities and their financing of student activities must be conducted in an Open, Accessible, Democratic, Non-Discriminatory and Legally and Financially Responsible manner. These conditions are necessary for the objects and purposes of 91��ɫ to be advanced, and for all students to enjoy the freedom to associate and express themselves through student organizations. Where student organizations act consistently with this principle, 91��ɫ will support their ability to communicate, explore and debate ideas, organize and use its facilities for lawful purposes, distribute materials on campus, and engage in peaceful demonstrations. 91��ɫ will not deny privileges to a student organization simply on account of its beliefs or procedures, unless those beliefs or procedures are contrary to the foregoing principle or lead to activities that are contrary to it.

1.3 ���������� The privileges extended by 91��ɫ to student organizations under this Regulation are based upon the observance and assumption of certain procedures and responsibilities, which give effect to the governing principle outlined above. These privileges may be denied or withdrawn if the procedures or responsibilities in this Regulation are neglected or not fulfilled.

1.4���������� Legal powers and responsibilities conferred by the 91��ɫ Act, 1965 on the President and the Board of Governors in relation to student organizations, activities and finances prevent the full devolution of authority onto student organizations. However, the President’s and Board of Governors’ respective powers and responsibilities should be exercised so far as is legally and practically possible in a manner consistent with the governing principle described in section 1.2 above. The Vice-Provost, Students, acting on behalf of the Board of Governors and the President, will support and advance this governing principle.

2. Purpose and Jurisdiction

2.1������������ This Regulation is made by the President pursuant to section 13(2)(c) of the 91��ɫ Act, 1965, and by the Board of Governors on the recommendation of the President pursuant to sections 10 and 13(2)(g) of the 91��ɫ Act, 1965, in order to govern student organizations, their activities and finances.

2.2 ���������� This Regulation sets forth the privileges and obligations of student organizations in order to ensure that their activities and their financing are conducted in an Open, Accessible, Democratic, Non-Discriminatory and Legally and Financially Responsible manner, so that the objects and purposes of 91��ɫ may be advanced.

3. Definitions and Concepts

3.1���������� Definitions. For the purposes of this Regulation, the following terms have the meanings given to them below:

“Associate Membership Agreement” means an agreement, between a Recognized Central Student Government and a Recognized Student Organization, that provides the members of the Student Organization with associate membership in the Recognized Central Student Government.

“Constituency” means the entire eligible membership of a Student Organization as set out in its Governing Documents.

“Governing Documents” means: (a) in the case of a Student Organization that is an unincorporated association, the Constitution of a Student Organization as described in Schedule C; and (b) in the case of a Student Organization that is incorporated, amalgamated or continued under the Corporations Act, R.S.O. 1990 (the “CA”), c. C.38, Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 2010, S.O. 2010, c.15 (the “NFPCA”) or comparable legislation, the letters patent, supplementary letters patent, articles of incorporation/amalgamation/continuance, by-laws and extraordinary or special resolutions of the Student Organization, as the case may be.

“������” means all applicable statutes, rules, orders, ordinances, and regulations of all governmental authorities.

“Levy” (or “Levies”) means a fee that has been approved in accordance with section 10 of this Regulation, and which the University adds to the financial account of every student member of a Student Organization and then remits to the applicable Student Organization in its discretion.

“Privileges” means the privileges set out in section 8 of this Regulation.

“Recognition” means the University’s formal acknowledgement of a Student Organization as eligible to receive Privileges in exchange for compliance with this Regulation. “Recognize” means acknowledge formally as eligible to receive Privileges in exchange for compliance with this Regulation. “Recognized” means having this University recognition.

�����������Գٲ��پ�����” for the purposes this Regulation means a representative of the University responsible for the enforcement of this Regulation and includes:

(a)�������������� For a Central Student Government, the Provost or designate;

(b)������������ For a Faculty Student Government, or a College Student Government, the Vice-Provost, Students or designate; and

(c)�������������� For a Student Club, the Director of Student Engagement or designate.

“Reviewing Office” has the meaning given to it in section 13.1 of this Regulation.

"Student Club" means a voluntary, membership-driven organization that is dedicated to a particular interest or activity for a specific Constituency. Recognized Student Clubs may have access to Privileges.

"Student Government" means a body representing all undergraduate or graduate students, or all students in a Faculty or College (respectively, a “Central Student Government”, a “Faculty Student Government”, or a “College Student Government”). A Student Government is normally concerned with a broad array of activities, including representation of the interests of those students in discussions with the academic and administrative authorities of the University, a Faculty, or a College. Recognized Student Governments may have access to Privileges.

“Student Organization” means a Student Government or a Student Club, but does not include the 91��ɫ Student Centre Incorporated. A Recognized Student Organization must either be an unincorporated association, or an entity incorporated, amalgamated or continued as a corporation under the CA, the NFPCA or comparable legislation.

“University Legislation” means all legislative texts enacted under the 91��ɫ Act, 1965, directly or through delegated authority, such as but not limited to:

The Code of Student Rights and Responsibilities

The Human Rights Policy and Procedures

The Policy on Alcohol and Cannabis Use and Procedures

The Policy on Posters

The Senate Policy on Computing and Information Technology Facilities

The Statement of Policy on Free Speech

The Temporary Use of University Space Policy and Procedures

and other Guidelines, Policies, Procedures, and Rules.

3.2���������� Concepts The following concepts to which Student Organizations are to adhere are explained in Schedule D:

“Open”, “Accessible”, “Democratic”;

“N�Dz�-�پ��������������Բ��ٴǰ���”;

“Financial Responsibility” (or “Financially Responsible”); and

“Legal Responsibility” (or “Legally Responsible”)

4. Recognition of Central Student Governments

4.1 ���������� Recognition of Central Student Governments. The University may Recognize a Central Student Government.

4.2 ���������� Continuance of Central Student Governments. The Recognition of a Central Student Government as of the latest effective date of this Regulation is continued unless and until such time as Recognition is withdrawn under sections 11 and 12. Central Student Governments continued at the enactment of this Regulation are:

(a) ������������ Undergraduate: The 91��ɫ Federation of Students (YFS) as the Central Student Government for all undergraduate students; and

(b) ������������ Graduate: The 91��ɫ Graduate Students' Association (YUGSA) as the Central Student Government for all graduate students.

4.3 ���������� A Recognized Central Student Government includes, represents and is accountable to all students enrolled in an undergraduate or graduate program of study at 91��ɫ.

4.4 ���������� Every student is, upon enrolment in an undergraduate or graduate program at the University, a member of, and pays a Levy to, a Recognized Central Student Government, either as a full member, or as an associate member where the student is a member of a Recognized Student Organization with an Associate Membership Agreement pursuant to 4.5.

4.5���������� A Recognized Central Student Government must define and provide associate membership through an Associate Membership Agreement to categories of Recognized Student Organizations whose members are beneficiaries of some of its activities but unable to participate in its affairs because of the location of their studies or other anomalous conditions. Furthermore:

(a)�������������� The Centre for Student Community & Leadership Development (“SCLD”) will act as a resource to facilitate Associate Membership Agreements; and

(b)������������ Allocations and/or (re)distribution of student Levy fees must be approved by the SCLD.

4.6���������� Only one Central Student Government may be Recognized for students registered in undergraduate programs and only one Central Student Government may be Recognized for students registered in graduate programs.

4.7���������� In the event of there being no Recognized Central Student Government for undergraduate students or none for graduate students, students from the relevant Constituency may seek to establish a Central Student Government for Recognition as follows:

Step 1 ������������ Serve on the Vice-Provost, Students a notice of intent to establish a Central Student Government for Recognition.

Step 2�������������� Meet with the Vice-Provost, Students to receive directions, and guidelines to conduct Steps 3-4, below, including but not limited to as to the appropriate referendum question(s).

Step 3 ������������ Obtain, through a petition, the consent of no less than 10% of the students enrolled as undergraduate students or graduate students, as the case may be, and submit the results to the Vice-Provost, Students. Upon receipt of the results of the petition, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether the petition was properly conducted according to the directions and guidelines and is, therefore, valid. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the petition is invalid, they may require that the petition be redone or terminate the process. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the petition is valid, they will invite students to proceed to Step 4.

Step 4 ������������ Conduct, in accordance with the Guidelines and Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda at 91��ɫ and using the University’s electronic voting system or a comparably secure system to which the Vice-Provost, Students has given prior approval in writing, a referendum of students who would constitute the Recognized Central Student Government’s members and submit the results to the Vice-Provost, Students. If petitions to Recognize more than one Central Student Government are submitted and determined to be valid, the referendum conducted under Step 4 must reflect that in the choice it puts to the students. In the event of multiple petitions, a preliminary referendum must be held on whether to Recognize any Central Student Government at all, and if it succeeds, a second referendum must be held to select which one of the candidate Central Student Governments will be Recognized. Upon receipt of the results of the referendum, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether it was properly conducted according to the Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda and is, therefore, valid. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the referendum is invalid, they may require that the referendum be redone or terminate the process. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the referendum is valid, they will certify the referendum result.

Step 5 ������������ In the case of a Central Student Government that is an unincorporated association, submit to the Vice-Provost, Students a draft Constitution that complies with Schedule C to this Regulation and that has been approved by a majority of the Central Student Government’s members. Upon receipt of the draft Constitution, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether it complies with this Regulation. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the draft Constitution is non-compliant, they may require that the draft be amended and resubmitted, as many times as is necessary to make the draft Constitution compliant. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the draft Constitution is compliant, they will recommend to the President that the Central Student Government be Recognized.

In the case of a Central Student Government that is incorporated, amalgamated or continued under the CA, the NFPCA or comparable legislation, submit to the Vice-Provost, Students all Governing Documents.�� Upon receipt of the Governing Documents, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether they are consistent with this Regulation.���� If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that any aspects of the Governing Documents which are not mandated by legislation (including the corporate objects or governance processes of the Central Student Government) are inconsistent with the concepts of Openness, Accessibility, Democracy, Non-Discrimination and Legal and Financial Responsibility in this Regulation, they may request that the Governing Documents be amended and resubmitted as many times as is necessary to make the Governing Documents consistent.���� If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the Governing Documents are consistent with this Regulation, they will recommend to the President that the Central Student Government be Recognized.

Step 6�������������� Upon receiving the recommendation from the Vice-Provost, Students, the President will normally grant Recognition to the Central Student Government.

4.8���������� In the event of there being a Recognized Central Student Government for undergraduate students or for graduate students, students from the relevant level may put forward a petition seeking to replace its Recognition with that of another Central Student Government, following the same procedure as in section 4.7 with any necessary modifications.

5. Recognition of Faculty Student Governments

5.1 ���������� Recognition of a Faculty Student Government. The University may Recognize a Faculty Student Government.

5.2 ���������� Continuance of Faculty Student Governments. The Recognition of a Faculty Student Government Recognized as of the latest effective date of this Regulation is continued unless and until such time as Recognition is withdrawn under sections 11 and 12.

5.3 ���������� A Recognized Faculty Student Government includes, represents and is accountable to all students enrolled in programs within that Faculty at 91��ɫ.

5.4���������� Every student is, upon enrolment in a Faculty at the University, a member of, and pays a Levy to, the Recognized Faculty Student Government of that Faculty.

5.5 ���������� Only one Faculty Student Government may be Recognized per Faculty.

5.6 ���������� As of the Approval Date of this Regulation, Recognized Faculty Student Governments are those listed in Schedule A.

5.7 ���������� Students in any Faculty without a Recognized Faculty Student Government may seek to establish a Faculty Student Government for Recognition, as follows:

Step 1 ������������ Serve on the Vice-Provost, Students a notice of intent to establish a Faculty Student Government for Recognition.

Step 2�������������� Meet with the Vice-Provost, Students to receive directions, and guidelines to conduct Steps 3-4, below, including but not limited to as to the appropriate referendum question(s).

Step 3 ������������ Obtain through a petition, the consent of no less then 10% of the students enrolled in the Faculty to seek, in their name, to establish a Faculty Student Government for Recognition and submit the results to the Vice-Provost, Students. Upon receipt of the results of the petition, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether the petition was properly conducted according to the directions and guidelines and is, therefore, valid. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the petition is invalid, they may require that the petition be redone or terminate the process. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the petition is valid, they will invite students to proceed to Step 4.

Step 4 ������������ Conduct, in accordance with the Guidelines and Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda at 91��ɫ and using the University’s electronic voting system or a comparably secure system to which the Vice-Provost, Students has given prior approval in writing, a referendum of students enrolled in the Faculty and submit the results to the Vice-Provost, Students. If petitions for more than one Faculty Student Government have been submitted and determined to be valid, the referendum conducted under Step 4 must reflect that in the choice it puts to the students. In the event of multiple petitions, a preliminary referendum must be held on whether to Recognize any Faculty Student Government at all, and if it succeeds, a second referendum must be held to select which one of the candidate Faculty Student Governments will be Recognized. Upon receipt of the results of the referendum, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether it was properly conducted according to the Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda and is, therefore, valid. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the referendum is invalid, they may require that the referendum be redone or terminate the process. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the referendum is valid, they will certify the referendum result.

Step 5�������������� In the case of a Faculty Student Government that is an unincorporated association, submit to the Vice-Provost, Students a draft Constitution that complies with Schedule C to this Regulation and that has been approved by a majority of the Faculty Student Government’s members. Upon receipt of the draft Constitution, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether it complies with this Regulation. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the draft Constitution is non-compliant, they may require that the draft be amended and resubmitted, as many times as is necessary to make the draft Constitution compliant. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the draft Constitution is compliant, they will recommend to the President that the Faculty Student Government be Recognized.

In the case of a Faculty Student Government that is incorporated, amalgamated or continued under the CA, the NFPCA or comparable legislation, submit to the Vice-Provost, Students all Governing Documents.�� Upon receipt of the Governing Documents, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether they are consistent with this Regulation.���� If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that any aspects of the Governing Documents which are not mandated by legislation (including the corporate objects or governance processes of the Faculty Student Government) are inconsistent with the concepts of Openness, Accessibility, Democracy, Non-Discrimination and Legal and Financial Responsibility in this Regulation, they may request that the Governing Documents be amended and resubmitted as many times as is necessary to make the Governing Documents consistent.�� If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the Governing Documents are consistent with this Regulation, they will recommend to the President that the Faculty Student Government be Recognized.

Step 6�������������� Upon receiving the recommendation from the Vice-Provost, Students, the President will normally grant Recognition to the Faculty Student Government.

5.8 ���������� In the event a new Faculty is created, the Vice-Provost, Students may give notice to students in the new Faculty of the steps to seek Recognition of a new Faculty Student Government under section 5.7.

5.9���������� In the event of there being a Recognized Faculty Student Government for any Faculty, students in that Faculty may put forward a petition seeking to replace its Recognition with that of another Faculty Student Government, following the same procedure as in section 5.7 with any necessary modifications.

6. Recognition of College Student Governments

6.1 ���������� Recognition of a College Student Government. The University may Recognize a College Student Government.

6.2 ���������� Continuance of College Student Governments. The Recognition of a College Student Government Recognized as of the effective date of this Regulation is continued unless and until such time as Recognition is withdrawn under sections 11 and 12.

6.3 ���������� Students in any College without a Recognized College Student Government may seek to establish a Recognized College Student Government in the manner set out in sections 4.7 and 5.7, modified so that the students who may sign the petition and vote in the referendum are only those who are affiliated with that College. Upon receiving the recommendation from the Vice-Provost, Students, the President will normally grant Recognition to the College Student Government.

6.4 ���������� A Recognized College Student Government includes, represents and is accountable to all undergraduate students affiliated with that College at 91��ɫ.

6.5 ���������� Every undergraduate student enrolled in a program offered at the Keele Campus is affiliated with a College at the University upon enrolment, and becomes a member of, and pays a Levy to, the Recognized College Student Government of that College.�� Every undergraduate student enrolled in a program offered at the Markham Campus is affiliated with the Markham Campus upon enrolment, and becomes a member of, and pays a Levy to the Markham Student Council.

6.6 ���������� Only one College Student Government may be Recognized per College.

6.7���������� As of the Approval Date of this Regulation, Recognized College Student Governments are those listed in Schedule B.

6.8���������� In the event of there being a Recognized College Student Government for any College, students in that College may put forward a petition seeking to replace it with another College Student Government, following the same procedure as in sections 4.7 and 5.7 with any necessary modifications.

7. Recognition of Student Clubs

7.1 ���������� Recognition of Student Clubs.�� Student Clubs are formed by Students to pursue and contribute to the educational, recreational, social, or cultural quality and diversity of life on campus. The University may Recognize a Student Club.

7.2 ���������� Continuance of Student Clubs. The Recognition of a Student Club Recognized as of the effective date of this Regulation is continued unless and until such time as Recognition is withdrawn under sections 11 and 12, or the Student Club fails to seek or obtain the annual renewal of its Recognition under section 7.12.

7.3 ���������� All Student Clubs seeking Recognition must successfully submit to SCLD a completed Student Club Application that demonstrates compliance with the following requirements:

(a)�������������� It provides the Student Club’s contact information;

(b)������������ It provides the names, student numbers, and email addresses of 15 currently registered 91��ɫ students who are members of the Student Club. At any time, SCLD can require the Student Club to produce a list of 15 currently registered 91��ɫ students who will be contacted by SCLD and asked to attest that they are active members of the Student Club;

(c)�������������� It confirms that the Student Club’s executives and 80% of the Student Club’s members are currently registered 91��ɫ students. Because academic departments vary in size there is no minimum number of members required for an academic Student Club but they are still required to submit a membership list;

(d)������������ It identifies any non-91��ɫ members of the Student Club. 91��ɫ alumni are non-91��ɫ for the purpose of this requirement and the Student Club must confirm that its non-91��ɫ members are non-voting members;

(e)�������������� It specifies any Departmental/College/Faculty affiliations;

(f)�������������� It confirms that there are two signing officers and provides the personal contact information for each of them. Signing officers must be currently registered 91��ɫ students throughout their term as signing officers. Student Club Recognition will lapse automatically for as long as this requirement is not met. Reinstatement will be at the discretion of SCLD. No student may be a signing officer for two or more Student Clubs simultaneously. This does not preclude a student who is a signing officer for one Student Club from being an executive or officer of another Student Club, provided they do not have signing authority in both roles;

(g)�������������� It provides the Student Club’s up-to-date Governing Documents, even if these have been provided in previous years;

(h)������������ For a renewing Student Club, it provides a copy of the most recent election meeting minutes confirming that there has been a democratic procedure for change in leadership as well as ratification of the new executive leaders;

(i)���������������� Also for a renewing Student Club, it provides a copy of the Student Club’s most recent bank statement if it has a bank account;

(j)���������������� It provides the signed agreement of the signing officers to ensure that the Student Club abides by the 91��ɫ Act, 1965, University Legislation, this Regulation and its Governing Documents; and

(k)�������������� The Student Club must also acknowledge that 91��ɫ does not insure or indemnify the Student Club, its members or any third parties with whom the Student Club interacts.

7.4. �������� Where any information provided in the Student Club Application is insufficient, the Student Club will be asked to provide more details to SCLD.

7.5 ���������� SCLD reserves the right to refuse a Student Club’s request for Recognition on one or more of a number of grounds including:

(a) ������������ It fails to meet the requirements in this Regulation;

(b)������������ In the case of a Student Club that is an unincorporated association, it does not have a Constitution which complies with Schedule C, or in the case of a Student Club that is incorporated, amalgamated or continued under the CA, the NFPCA or comparable legislation, any aspects of the Governing Documents which are not mandated by legislation (including the corporate objects or governance processes of the Student Club) are inconsistent with the governing principle that Student Organizations’ activities and their financing of student activities must be conducted in an Open, Accessible, Democratic, Non-Discriminatory and Legally and Financially Responsible manner;

(c)�������������� It appears that the Student Club’s objectives are so similar to the objectives or programming of an existing Student Club or University department that, in the opinion of the Manager, 91��ɫ, SCLD there would not be sufficient differentiation between the proposed club and that which is already in existence;

(d) ������������ There is a reasonable basis for the Director, Student Engagement, to conclude that the proposed Student Club:

(i) �������������� is seeking Recognition to avoid the impact of a suspension or other discipline or sanctions imposed on another Student Club with similar objectives or membership; or

(ii)�������������� may be acting as an agent or conduit for a group, organization or other third party external to the University to increase its clientele or promote its business or cause.

7.6���������� All academic Student Clubs that are dedicated to an interest or activity for the Constituency of a specific Faculty Student Government must be affiliated with the relevant academic program or major Faculty at the university. When seeking Recognition, academic Student Clubs must obtain prior approval of the specific academic department or Faculty before moving forward with registration.

7.7���������� All religion and faith-based Student Clubs must be members of the Inter-Faith Council (IFC) of 91��ɫ. Recognition of religion and faith-based Student Clubs is not based on principles of faith or substantive beliefs but rather on willingness to comply with the requirements of the Inter-Faith Council, including the Three Pillars of Tolerance, and whether similar clubs currently exist at the university.

7.8 ���������� All sport-related Student Clubs must go through an additional review procedure conducted by the Athletics & Recreation department to determine the necessary precautions and documentation needed for the club to be Recognized.

7.9 ���������� If Recognition is denied, the Student Club may appeal this decision by providing a written statement to SCLD explaining why it believes the grounds for refusal are incorrect: for example, it has met these rules, its objectives are unique, its intended membership is distinct and it can differentiate its objectives or programming from those of an existing club or university department. This appeal will be reviewed by the Vice-Provost, Students who will make a final determination as to whether the denial of Recognition stands or whether the Student Club may be Recognized.

7.10������ If Recognition is granted, the executives and signing officers of the Student Club must complete the Student Clubs 101 Orientation Session offered during the then current Student Clubs registration period. The final Student Clubs 101 Orientation Session will take place after the Student Clubs Application deadline has passed to ensure last-minute submissions have a chance to attend the session. Failure to meet this requirement will void Recognition without resort to and notwithstanding the procedures in sections 11-13 of this Regulation.

7.11������ If Recognition is granted, the executives and signing officers of the Student Club must also complete training modules on the use of additional resources at the University. Failure to meet this requirement will void Recognition without resort to and notwithstanding the procedures in sections 11-13 of this Regulation.

7.12������ Student Club Recognition expires annually on September 30. Recognized Student Clubs are required to annually renew their Recognition no later than the second Tuesday in October by completing the procedures set out in section 7.3 within one year from the date on which their Recognition was granted or last renewed, subject to any extension of this timeline by SCLD. In the event such a Student Club fails to seek renewed Recognition within the timeframe for so doing, all Privileges granted to the Student Club including their YU Connect page, email account and website, will be considered inactive and may be disabled by the University.

7.13������ Student Clubs may not use the name of “91��ɫ” or “91��ɫ” in their official name but may identify that the Student Club is “at 91��ɫ” (e.g. “Chess Club at 91��ɫ”, which may be abbreviated to “CCY” but not “YCC”). Exceptions to this must have received prior written consent of 91��ɫ pursuant to the Brand Stewardship Policy and Guidelines.

7.14������ The Vice-Provost, Students will publish a list of Recognized Student Clubs annually.

8. Privileges of Recognized Student Organizations

8.1 ���������� Subject to compliance with this Regulation, availability and appropriate agreements with the University, the University may at its discretion grant to Recognized Student Organizations, in accordance with Law and University Legislation, any or all of the following Privileges:

(a)�������������� Use of the University electronic voting system for Recognized Student Governments;

(b)������������ Student Levies in accordance with section 9.

(c)�������������� Financial and in-kind University grants or donations;

(d)������������ University-hosted email addresses and website URLs;

(e)�������������� University office space;

(f)�������������� Use of University space and facilities including tabling space;

(g)�������������� University classroom technology;

(h)������������ Membership contact information for the purpose of direct electronic communication, subject to a privacy agreement in the form defined by the Vice-Provost, Students; and

(i)���������������� Support coordinated through the Vice-Provost, Students or designate such as support for: training, resources, guidance and events.

9. Levies for Recognized Student Organizations

9.1 ���������� A Recognized Student Organization may seek the establishment, amendment or cancellation of a Levy from its Constituency as follows:

Step 1 ������������ Deliver to the Vice-Provost, Students proof of operation for no less than two academic years, together with a notice of its intent to seek the establishment, amendment, or cancellation of a Levy.

Step 2 ������������ Meet with the Vice-Provost, Students or designate to receive directions and guidelines to conduct Steps 3 and 4, below.

Step 3�������������� Obtain, through a petition, the consent of no less then 10% of its Constituency and submit the results of the petition to the Vice-Provost, Students. Upon receipt of the results of the petition, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether the petition was properly conducted according to the directions and guidelines given in Step 2, and is, therefore, valid. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the petition is invalid, they may require that the petition be redone or terminate the process. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the petition is valid, they will invite students to proceed to Step 4.

Step 4 ������������ Conduct, in accordance with the Guidelines and Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda at 91��ɫ and using the University’s electronic voting system or a comparably secure system�� to which the Vice-Provost, Students has given prior approval in writing, a referendum of students who would be subject to the Levy and submit the results to the Vice-Provost, Students. Upon receipt of the results of the referendum, the Vice-Provost, Students will determine whether it was properly conducted according to the Procedures for the Conduct of Student Referenda and is, therefore, valid. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the referendum is invalid, they may require that the referendum be redone or terminate the process. If the Vice-Provost, Students determines that the referendum is valid, they will recommend to the Provost that the Levy be established, amended or cancelled as the case may be. The Provost will normally submit the recommendation to the Board of Governors for approval.

9.2 ���������� Student Organizations with no Levy funding are not precluded from charging members modest membership fees and/or reasonable cost recovery charges to finance the Student Organization’s activities. Information about all membership fee rates and benefits associated with membership must be publicly available.

10. Obligations of Recognized Student Organizations

10.1 ���� A Recognized Student Organization must:

(a) ������������ Conduct itself in an Open, Accessible, Democratic, Non-Discriminatory and Legally and Financially Responsible manner, including with respect to its formation, operation, funding and financial affairs;

(b) ������������ For Student Organizations in which student membership is mandatory or that receive a Levy, conduct elections at least once each academic year; such elections must be conducted through the University’s electronic voting system, or a comparably secure system to which the Vice-Provost, Students has given prior approval in writing. For greater certainty only, the Vice-Provost, Students may approve only electronic voting systems which are comparably or more secure than the University’s electronic voting system;

(c) ������������ Submit to the University by July 1 annually, or from time to time at the University’s request, and in the format and by the date as may be required by the University from time to time, the following documents, that the University will publish:

(i)���������������� A current list of the names, titles, and email addresses of each officer, including the treasurer or equivalent;

(ii)�������������� A current list of the names, titles and email addresses of each officer with signing authority;

(iii)������������ A copy of the most up-to-date Governing Documents;

(iv) ���������� A copy of its financial statements for the preceding fiscal year (May 1 to April 30). In the case of Student Organizations in which membership is mandatory or that receive a Levy, where the gross revenue for the fiscal year exceeded $40,000 (including Levy and non-Levy) the Student Organizations must provide audited financial statements from a certified auditor. In the case of Student Organizations whose financial statements show gross revenue for the fiscal year was $40,000 or less (including Levy and non-Levy), the Student Organizations must provide a Review Engagement Report prepared by a licensed public accountant. A Student Club without a Levy is exempt from this requirement but must provide a copy of its most recent bank statements;

(v)�������������� A document signed by each officer acknowledging the organization’s obligation to comply with all University Legislation; and

(vi)������������ Any additional document or information that the University deems, at its sole discretion, to be necessary to verify compliance with the Regulation and University Legislation;

(d)������������ Apply for and obtain approval from the Vice-Provost, Students or designate prior to incorporating, amalgamating or continuing under the CA, the NFPCA or comparable legislation, so that 91��ɫ may satisfy itself that any aspects of the Governing Documents which are not mandated by legislation (including the corporate objects or governance processes of the Student Organization), are consistent with the concepts of Openness, Accessibility, Democracy, Non-Discrimination and Legal and Financial Responsibility in this Regulation;

(e)�������������� Notify the Vice-Provost, Students or designate within 14 days following any change in its Governing Documents and any change in its officers including officers with signing authority;

(f)�������������� Not divert its funds to purposes inconsistent with the Student Organization’s purpose, objects or Governing Documents;

(g)�������������� Not engage in activities that are essentially commercial in nature, such as, but not limited to:

(i) �������������� Providing goods and/or services for profit; or

(ii) ������������ Engaging in an activity or function on behalf of a third party commercial organization that is contributing promotional goods or services but is not contributing direct sponsorship of activities that are consistent with an essential purpose or purposes of the Student Organization; and

(h) ������������ Have and adhere to policies and procedures to address real, potential, or apparent conflicts of interest, including with respect to awarding of contracts to, acceptance of gifts by, payments made to, or other benefits provided to officers, employees, members and persons who are related by family, marriage or other personal relationship to any officer, employee or member.

11. Non-Compliance By Recognized Student Organizations

11.1 ���� Recognized Student Organizations that do not comply with any part of this Regulation may face sanctions for breach of this Regulation.

11.2������ When the University has reason to believe that a Recognized Student Organization:

(a)�������������� Has not, or may not have, operated in an Open, Accessible, Democratic, Non-Discriminatory or Legally or Financially Responsible manner; or

(b)������������ Is in breach of any agreement with the University;

the University may provide written notice of any suspected breach to the Student Organization through the Centre for Student Community Leadership Development. The University may stay further proceedings under this Regulation until after the internal complaint process of the Student Organization has been exhausted, or a reasonable period of time for exhausting it has elapsed, other than in exceptional circumstances.

11.3������ The Centre for Student Community Leadership Development will prepare the written notice in the case of any suspected breach by any Recognized Student Organization. The notice will include the following information:

(a) ������������ The nature of the suspected breach;

(b)������������ What the Student Organization is required to do, either to demonstrate that a breach has not occurred or to remedy the breach;

(c) ������������ The date for compliance with paragraph (b);

(d) ������������ The terms of any interim measures, such as suspension or withdrawal of Privileges, that the Representative deems appropriate, the reasons for those interim measures, and the date on which they take effect;

(e) ������������ The date for delivery of submissions by the Student Organization in response to any interim measures imposed, and any format requirements for such submissions;

(f)�������������� The potential consequences for failure to comply with any requirements under paragraph (b) by the date provided under paragraph (c), which may include sanctions until there is compliance; and

(g)�������������� That the suspected breach will be addressed in either a written or oral hearing, based upon the Representative’s assessment of the complexity of the suspected breach and the severity of potential consequences.

11.4������ The Representative will conduct a written or oral hearing in accordance with the principles of procedural fairness before making a determination whether the Recognized Student Organization has been and/or remains in breach of this Regulation. The hearing shall be conducted by a Representative who was not involved in investigating the suspected breach or in preparing and providing the written notice of it.

11.5 ���� In conducting a hearing, the Representative may consult with members of the Student Representative Roundtable or other student organization(s) as appropriate in the opinion of the Representative. Such consultations are strictly confidential.

11.6 ���� The Representative will issue their decision which will include written reasons for their determination of whether the Recognized Student Organization has been and/or remains in breach of this Regulation.

11.7������ At any point prior to a determination, the Representative may suggest alternative dispute resolution processes on such terms as they consider appropriate having regard to the nature of the suspected breach.

12. Sanctions Applicable to Recognized Student Organizations

12.1������ If the Representative determines that a Recognized Student Organization is or remains in breach of this Regulation they will provide the Student Organization with a period of 7 days from the date of their decision to deliver written submissions on sanctions should the Student Organization wish to do so.

12.2������ In determining a sanction proportionate to the breach, the Representative will first consider any written submissions on sanctions from the Recognized Student Organization and any mitigating and aggravating circumstances.

12.3������ Sanctions imposed on the Recognized Student Organization may include one or more of the following:

(a)�������������� The suspension or revocation of one or more Privileges, except as already provided under subsections (c)-(e) below;

(b)������������ The requirement to participate in a remedial or educative process;

(c)������������ The suspension, in whole or in part, for a reasonable period of the transfer of Levies to the Student Organization on such terms as the Representative determines appropriate, after which the University may decide, in its discretion, either to proceed to transfer the levies to the Student Organization or to refund the Levies to the students who paid them;

(d)������������ The termination of the collection of any Levies; and

(e)�������������� The withdrawal of Recognition of the Student Organization.

12.4������ The Representative will issue their decision which will include written reasons for their determination of sanctions.

12.5 ���� The sanction in section 12.3(c) takes immediate effect on an interim basis subject to approval by the Board of Governors after any review process in section 13 of this Regulation has been exhausted. If the Board does not approve the sanctions, the University must as soon as reasonably possible arrange to account for and transfer the Levies to the Recognized Student Organization.

12.6 ���� In any case in which the sanction in sections 12.3(d) or 12.3(e) is imposed which involves the termination of the collection of any Levies, such termination will not take effect unless and until it is approved by the Board of Governors after the review process in section 13 of this Regulation has been exhausted.

12.7������ Continued non-compliance after a determination of breach of this Regulation, or failure to comply with sanctions imposed, may give rise to notice of subsequent suspected breach and may also be an aggravating factor considered in determining sanctions for a subsequent breach.

13. Review Process for Non-Compliance and Sanctions Decisions

13.1������ A Recognized Student Organization that has been determined to be in breach of this Regulation or that has been sanctioned for such a breach under sections 11 and 12 may request a review of that decision on grounds of jurisdiction, bias or other procedural irregularity. The review will be conducted through the University Office to which the Representative reports, by individuals other than the Representative who were not involved in investigating the suspected breach or in preparing and providing the written notice of it (“Reviewing Office”).

13.2������ Except in the circumstance described in 13.4, a Recognized Student Organization may request a review pursuant to section 13.1 by submitting a written request for review to the Reviewing Office, with a copy to the Representative, within 7 days of the date on which the decision was issued to the Student Organization under section 11.6 or 12.4. The written request for review will include: the grounds upon which the review is sought, and the evidentiary basis for the review. The Representative will forthwith submit a copy of the documentation in their file to the Reviewing Office.

13.3������ The Reviewing Office will, as soon as possible and in any event no later than 21 days after the submission of the request for review, communicate the name of the reviewer to the Recognized Student Organization along with a proposed timeline for the review. The Reviewing Office’s determination of the review will be issued to the Student Organization in writing as soon as possible and in any event no later than 60 days after the request for review was submitted.

13.4������ Where the Representative is the Provost or designate, a Student Organization may request a review of the decision by submitting a written request for review to the President, with copy to the Provost or designate, within 7 days of the date on which the decision was issued to the Student Organization under sections 11.6 or 12.4.�� The written request for review will include: the grounds upon which the review is sought, and the evidentiary basis for the review. The Representative will forthwith submit a copy of the documentation in their file to the President.

13.5������ In the case of a review requested under section 13.4, the President may:

(a)�������������� Conduct the review personally, in which case the President’s determination of the review will be issued to the Student Organization in writing as soon as possible and in any event no later than 60 days after the request for review was submitted; or

(b)������������ Direct that the review be conducted by an independent reviewer and promptly communicate that to the Student Organization. The President will appoint the independent reviewer as soon as possible and in any event no later than 21 days after of the submission of the request for a review and will promptly communicate the name of the reviewer to the Student Organization along with a timeline for the review. The independent reviewer will submit recommendations to the President. The President’s determination will be informed by the recommendations made by the independent reviewer and will be made and communicated to the Student Organization in writing as soon as possible and in any event no later than 60 days after the independent reviewer was appointed.

13.6 ���� The Reviewing Office may sustain, amend or rescind the Representative’s decision.

13.7 ���� The determination of the Reviewing Office on review of a decision under this Regulation is final, subject to any required approval by the Board of Governors under sections 12.5-12.6.

14. Review of this Regulation

14.1������ This Regulation will be reviewed at least once every five years after its effective date. In addition, the section(s) of this Regulation that address Recognition of new Student Organizations will also be reviewed at an appropriate time after the opening of the new multi-Faculty Markham Campus, allowing for input from students from that newly established campus and other appropriate Student Governments.

14.2 ���� The Vice-Provost, Students will initiate and oversee the review process which will include consultation with students, representatives of Student Organizations, faculty, staff and other community members.

15. Coming into Force

15.1 ���� This Regulation will have full force and effect from January 1, 2023.

16. Short Title

16.1 ���� This Regulation may be cited as the Regulation Regarding Student Organizations.

SCHEDULE A

to Regulation Regarding Student Organizations

Recognized Faculty Student Governments

Creative Arts Students Association

Environmental and Urban Change Students’ Association

Faculty of Education Students' Association

Faculty of Health Student Caucus

Graduate Business Council

Lassonde Student Government

Legal and Literary Society of Osgoode Hall Law School

Student Council of Liberal Arts & Professional Studies

Undergraduate Business Society

SCHEDULE B

to Regulation Regarding Student Organizations

Recognized College Student Governments

��Bethune College Council

Calumet College Council

Founders College Student Council

Glendon College Student Union

Markham Student Council

McLaughlin College Council

New College Council

Stong College Student Government

Vanier College Council

Winters College Council

SCHEDULE C

to Regulation Regarding Student Organizations

Constitutional Requirements for Recognized Unincorporated Student Organizations

The Regulation Regarding Student Organizations advances the objects and purposes of the 91��ɫ Act, 1965 and the freedom of students to associate and express themselves through Student Organizations by requiring that Recognized Student Organizations conduct their activities and their financing of student activities in an Open, Accessible, Democratic, Non-Discriminatory and Legally and Financially Responsible manner. 91��ɫ’s interest in the Constitution of Recognized Student Organizations reflects this governing principle. In keeping with this, as a condition of Recognition, a Student Organization that is an unincorporated association must develop and continuously maintain a Constitution that is approved by a majority of its members and that complies with the following requirements. Student Organizations that are incorporated, amalgamated or continued under the CA, the NFPCA or comparable legislation are not required to possess such a Constitution, as the provisions of those statutes and associated regulations, and the Governing Documents required under them, already generally require the Student Organization to conduct their activities and their financing of student activities consistent with the governing principle.

1. Interpretation:The Constitution must describe whose interpretation is authoritative. Example: The Council of ___________ shall be the sole authority for the interpretation of the Constitution. The Council shall, however, make all determinations of construction and interpretation with due regard to accepted rules of procedure, e.g. Roberts Rules of Order. The Speaker of the Organization, subject to an appeal to the Council, is generally the first source for interpretation of the Constitution.
2. Objects:The Constitution must clearly state the objects of the Student Organization and these must match the published corporate objects in the Governing Documents if the Student Organization is a corporation. Such statements of objects must be consistent with University regulations, policies, procedures, guidelines and federal and provincial laws, including the Ontario Human Rights Code. If they are not consistent, the Student Organization will be in breach of this Regulation until the inconsistency is corrected.
3. Powers:��The Constitution must clearly state the powers accorded to the Organization, its members and elected representatives, i.e., members of the Council (or Board of Directors, as the case may be), members of the Executive and members of any standing committees. Such powers must be exercised in a manner that is consistent with the published Objects of the Student Organization.
4. Membership-Constituency:The Constitution must clearly define constituency and criteria for membership.
5. Membership Criteria for Council, Executive and Standing Committees:The Constitution must clearly define criteria for Council membership, Executive membership and standing committee membership.�� These criteria must include: (a) qualifications for membership; (b) maximum terms of office; (c) procedures to deal with vacancies; and (d) the responsibilities and privileges associated with membership. Such criteria must be consistent with the Ontario Human Rights Code. Where a salary is paid by the Student Organization, there must be a job description for the role (see 15, below). Definitions of full vs. associate memberships should be included if applicable. (Example: “The voting members of Council are: the President, the Vice-President of Finance,…”.)
6. Duties of Members:The Constitution must clearly describe the duties of all members of Council and/or of elected representatives. Job descriptions should also be included. (see 11, below). (Example: The duties of the President are ..., the duties of the Secretary are ..., the duties of the Senators are..., etc.)
7. Associate Membership: The Constitution may, and in the case of a Central Student Government must, provide for associate membership for categories of Recognized Student Organizations who are beneficiaries of some of its activities but unable to participate in its affairs because of the location of their studies or other anomalous conditions.
8. Conflict of Interest:As per section 10.1(h) of this Regulation, the Constitution must address the issue of conflict of interest for members of the Executive, Council, standing committees, and/or members of advisory/management boards (see 17, below).
9. Election Procedures:The Constitution must prescribe annual election procedures by which positions will be filled, and procedures for dealing with vacancies in executive positions. These procedures must clearly: (a) assign responsibility for calling elections; (b) require the advertising of elections in a manner that ensures that members will have ample opportunity to participate (c) require the use of the University’s electronic voting system, or a comparably secure system to which the Vice-Provost, Students has given prior approval in writing; and (d) appoint a trained Chief Returning Officer (CRO) to approve election results and either challenge, or respond to and resolve challenges to, elections procedures and/or results.�� A job description for the CRO must also be provided and published to the members. Descriptions of nomination procedures, definitions of eligibility to vote, to run for office, campaign guidelines (expenses) and ballot and polling procedures must also be stipulated.
10. Procedures of Council:The Constitution must include provisions for the following Procedures of Council: (a) frequency of meetings; (b) who has responsibility for calling and for chairing meetings and setting the agenda; (c) how notice for meetings will be given; (d) how much notice is required for meetings (e) who has voting privileges at meetings; (f) procedures for proxy voting (if desired); (g) a procedure to deal with tie votes; and (h) quorum requirements for all orders of business, including but not limited to meetings of Council and meetings of the Elected Officials.
11. Financial Responsibility:The Constitution must exhibit Financial Responsibility by identifying: (a) the fiscal year; (b) positions with signing authority; (c) who is to strike the budget; (d) what steps are required before the budget is approved; (e) the percentage of votes needed to approve the budget; (f) who is to maintain the financial records of the organization; (g) who is to prepare financial reports and make them available to members; and (h) who is responsible for financial reporting to the University. The Constitution must also indicate how any residual funds or debts are to be treated in the event that a Student Organization is not expecting to be continued past the end of the current year.
12. Committees:The Constitution must create and describe all standing committees, including: (a) their terms of reference; (b) who may serve and vote on them; (c) any ex officio members; (d) quorum requirements; (e) responsibilities; and (f) reporting requirements.
13. Amendment Procedures:The Constitution must include fair amendment procedures, stating how much notice is required for members to introduce proposed changes to the Constitution and/or by-laws; and quorum, voting procedures and voting requirements for such proposals. The Constitution must permit 10% or more of the relevant student members to propose an amendment to any Constitutional provision (unless that is incompatible with another provision of this Regulation). If such a proposal is made it must then be put to a majority vote at a duly constituted meeting of the members of the Student Organization.
14. External Affiliations:If necessary, the Constitution should include descriptions of any affiliations and/or jurisdictional relationships. (Example: membership in outside organizations such as Canadian Federation of Students.)
15. Employees:The Constitution must include job descriptions for all employees of the organization or otherwise identify where these are located and made accessible to members. Descriptions should indicate employees' responsibilities and terms of employment, as well as who has responsibility for hiring, supervising and disciplining employees.
16. Custodian of the Constitution:Each funded Student Organization must designate an official "Custodian of the Constitution" for purposes of continuity between elected officials and for ensuring timely review and reporting regarding the Constitution. Where appropriate, a member of the Division of Students, Dean's or Head’s staff could fulfill this role. If the group has permanent employees, one of their own staff members may be charged with this custodial role.
17. Advisory/Management Boards:Student Organizations that own and operate small businesses on their own behalf on a non-profit basis, such as pubs, coffee shops, newspapers, games rooms, etc., must establish advisory/management boards to oversee these operations in an appropriate arms-length relationship to the businesses. To the extent possible, advisory/management boards must be composed of a combination of students, staff, faculty and alumni who can lend their respective expertise and perspectives to the Student Organization. Conflict of interest guidelines must be adhered to when selecting members of these advisory/management boards.
18. Allegations of Wrongdoing & Disciplinary Action:Along with the requirement for an internal complaints process (see 19, below) the Constitution must prescribe formal procedures for dealing with allegations of wrongdoing against any member of the Council, the Executive or a standing committee. Provisions must include the circumstances which might dictate disciplinary action (such as censure, suspension, or impeachment) and indicate whose responsibility it will be to hear allegations and/or impose sanctions. Provisions for replacing elected officials (by-elections) if and when vacancies occur must also be included. Such hearing processes must be conducted fairly, ensuring that the party facing the allegations has a fair and timely opportunity to present their own defence, and that the allegations are investigated or adjudicated by one or more unbiased student members of the Student Organization.
19. Internal Complaints Process: Student Organizations must adopt and publish on their website or other digital location a detailed and accessible internal process for addressing complaints about any aspect of their organization and its activity.
20. Accessibility of Documentation: Student Organizations must publish their meeting dates, agendas, motions, meeting minutes, Governing Documents, budgets and financial statements in a manner that may easily be accessed by their members (e.g. website, public social media accounts, YU Connect page).

SCHEDULE D

to Regulation Regarding Student Organizations

Characteristics of Concepts

1. Open, Accessible and Democratic

Openness, Accessibility and Democracy are broadly accepted ideals applicable to many community- based organizations. There is no single definition of what constitutes an Open organization, an Accessible one, or a Democratic one. The terms are inter-related, take on meaning depending on the context, and may vary by the size, scope and mandate of an organization. They may evolve as organizations and the expectations of their members change. For a Student Organization to be considered Open, Accessible and Democratic, the following attributes tend to apply.

The criteria listed below are not absolute, since they are meant to describe general standards in accordance with which Student Organizations, ranging in size and budget from very small to the very largest, should act. This Regulation acknowledges that organizations will choose various means to act in an Open, Accessible and Democratic way, and that variations in the application of these principles are to be expected.

Accessible Student Organizations are characterized by many of the following:

• Willingness and demonstrated desire to integrate both new members into the group, and the activities demonstrating same
• In the case of voluntary groups, an environment that seeks out and welcomes new members, with clearly articulated and publicly available criteria regarding how to join
• Commitment to, and actually encouraging and facilitating participation of all members in the full scope of the organization’s activities
• Transparency about what the activities are
• Openness to scrutiny
• Commitment to, and acting and communicating in accordance with the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion for all members
• Commitment to, and ensuring, clarity in communications
• Commitment to, and allowing and facilitating a diversity of perspectives to be heard
• Fair processes for members to initiate change

Democratic Student Organizations are characterized by many of the following:

• Openness to the participation of members in all activities
• Effective and clearly identified channels of communication between members and the Executive
• Transparency and accountability to the membership, including but not limited to budgeting and expenditures
• Transparent management
• Commitment to, and actually considering and respecting the range of members’ views whether majority or minority in nature
• Ensuring that those affected by decisions have an actual voice in processes leading to decisions
• Ways for dissent, and for complaints, to be considered and resolved and, where appropriate, processed at successively higher levels within the organization
• Ability of all members to stand for executive positions
• Impartial and fair elections processes that allow members to participate easily as both voters and candidates, including the provision of an arms-length chief returning officer for elections

Open Student Organizations are characterized by many of the following:

• Widely available information on the organization’s operations, membership, finances and mandate
• Transparency about rules of operations
• Willingness to freely share information about the organization with members
• Clear and transparent membership criteria
• Commitment to ensuring that meetings, events and activities of the organization are communicated to the membership in such a way that members are able to participate fully in such meetings, events and activities
• Commitment to ensuring that members’ voices and perspectives whether expressed individually or by a group, can be heard and, if appropriate, acted upon

2. Non-Discriminatory

Non-Discriminatory means free from harassment, prejudice, inequality and discrimination based on race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age, marital status, family status or disability. To be Non-Discriminatory a Student Organization must, among other things, treat all of its members equally in regards to, without limitation, its activities, corporate decisions, statements, and resolutions.

3. Financially Responsible (or Financial Responsibility) is characterized by the following:

• Making its budget and financial statements available to all of its members at all times
• Directing its funds only to the purposes required to achieve its Objects and in accordance with its Governing Documents, University Legislation including the requirements of this Regulation, and in compliance with Laws
• Compliance with section 11 of Schedule C

4. Legally Responsible (or Legal Responsibility) is characterized by the following:

• Compliance with Law, the 91��ɫ Act, 1965, University Legislation, this Regulation, Governing Documents and any applicable judicial precedents, court orders or orders of administrative tribunals (including those acting pursuant to the 91��ɫ Act, 1965, University Legislation and this Regulation).

The post Regulation Regarding Student Organizations appeared first on Secretariat Policies.

1.1 In this Procedure

“Approval Authority” means an office or an entity that may authorize a poster under section 5.

“Bulletin Board” means a space designated for posters,

“General Use Bulletin Boards” means a bulletin board provided on each campus for the temporary promotion of events and services or information sharing on University premises.������ General Use Bulletin Boards are located in central public areas of both campuses, including “A Wing” at Glendon, as well as in the Central Square, Curtis Lecture Halls, the Accolade West Building, the Colonnade, and the main floor Ross Building, Complex 1 and Complex 2 and such other areas that may be added from time to time.

“Local Reservation Agent” means University departments and units that have management oversight of specific bookable spaces which an eligible user may reserve directly with the department or unit.

“Official Notice Boards” means a bulletin board for the posting of notices by academic units, research units, employee groups or student groups. The Official Notice Boards are indicated with large signs and are designated for specific unit or group and contain contact information to inquire about posting.

2. Purpose

2.1 This Procedure establishes the process for poster approval, approval authorities, authorized posting locations, conditions for poster removal, use of the University name and brand logo, special circumstances, failure to comply with the procedure and associated policies, approval reviews, and the reporting of complaints related to posted material.

3. Authority

3.1 This Procedure in enacted pursuant to Section 5 of the University Policy on Posters.

4. Poster Content and Format

4.1 Posters must meet the following criteria:

a. The Poster adheres to applicable University policies, procedures, and regulations, as well as applicable municipal, provincial, and federal laws.

b. Posters must be in English or French, or both, or if in another language, must include translation in English or French.

c. Posters must include a contact name and contact information (i.e., name of individual or organization and email, phone, or office address)

d. The Poster’s dimension is no more than 11 x 17 inches.

5. Poster Approval

5.1 Eligible Users wishing to poster on 91��ɫ’s campuses must submit a request to an Approval Authority and receive approval before hanging posters. Authorities may delegate approvals to departmental staff.

5.2 The Approval Authority for General Use Bulletin Boards on the Keele Campus is the Manager, Accommodation & Conference Services. Posters (with exception of those from Glendon campus) must be submitted to the Office of Temporary Use of University Space (tuus@yorku.ca) prior to posting on General Use Bulletin Boards at the University’s Keele Campus.

5.3 Academic Unit Heads, Research Unit Heads, Employee Groups, Faculty Executive Officers, or their delegates are responsible for reviewing and approving Poster requests for their respective Official Notice Boards. Posters are to be submitted to the contact identified on the respective Official Notice Board.

5.4 For Glendon Campus, the Approval Authority is the Manager, Glendon Housing and Ancillary services. Posters must be submitted to the Manager, Glendon Housing and Ancillary Services (reserve@glendon.yorku.ca) prior to posting on General Use Bulletin Boards at the University’s Glendon Campus.

5.5 Approval Authorities shall review poster requests for compliance with criteria under section 4 and posters approved shall be digitally stamped and dated as approved by the Approval Authority prior to posting.

5.6 Where viable digital poster options (referred to as Advertising) are available, Approval Authorities may recommend their use instead of printed material. Digital signage requests and guidelines for LCD screens are available here /brand/social-media-and-digital-requirements/. Recognized Student Government and Student Organizations may submit requests for digital signage to the Centre for Student Community and Leadership Development (SCLD) using YU Connect.

6.�� Approval Review

6.1�� Eligible Users may submit in writing to the Office of Temporary Use of University Space (tuus@yorku.ca), a request for review of an Approval Authority’s decision not to approve a poster based on compliance with this and other policies and procedures. Reviews of the decision not to approve the poster will be conducted by the respective Approval Authority using a one-over-one approach.�� If the first level review of the decision not to approve the poster is unsuccessful, Eligible Users may escalate to a second level review. ����Decisions made following a second review are final.

7. Poster Locations

7.1 Posters are permitted on General Use Bulletin Boards and University Official Notice Boards.

7.2 Posters on General Use Bulletin Boards are limited to posters sharing information, promoting events held – and services delivered on - University premises. University sponsored events or services organized by Eligible Users but taking place off campus may also be posted on General Use Bulletin Boards.

7.3 Posters on Official Notice Boards are limited to posters sharing information, promoting events and services of Academic Units, Research Units, Student Groups and Employee Groups for their use.

7.4 Only one (1) poster for each event is allowed per board and cannot be placed in such a way as to obstruct other posters.

8. Removal of Posters

8.1 Following approval, posters may be posted no sooner than two (2) weeks prior to the event.

8.2 Eligible Users must remove posters (and staples or thumbtacks) within thirty-six (36) hours following the event or service.

8.3 The University will remove without notice posters that are not approved, posted on other than designated locations or that contravene this or other 91��ɫ policies or procedures. The costs of poster removal and repair of any damage caused by those breaching this procedure may be charged to the offending party and/or the withdrawing of postering privileges.

8.4 The University will remove posters from General Use Bulletin Boards on a bi-weekly basis (normally on Sunday).

8.5 Cleaning and monitoring of Official Notice Boards is the responsibility of the unit or group with authority to approve requests under this Procedure.

9 Use of 91��ɫ Name and Brand Logo

9.1 Only, Academic Units, Administrative Units and Research Units may use 91��ɫ’s name, marks, or logos (including sub-brands) on a poster provided approval has been obtained in accordance with the 91��ɫ Brand Stewardship Policy and Procedures, including:

a. Use of the 91��ɫ name on a Poster requires pre-approval (by the sponsoring University department head or designate; the Centre for Student Community and Leadership Development, for student organizations; or the Local Reservation Agent, when the University name is to be included in an event location).

b. The use of the 91��ɫ brand or logo must also be approved in advance (by University and Brand Marketing in the Communications and Public Affairs Division) and conform to 91��ɫ brand standards at yorku.ca/brand.

9.2 External Users seeking to use 91��ɫ’s name, marks or logos on a Poster must follow the approval process established in the 91��ɫ Brand Stewardship Policy and related Guidelines and Procedures which stipulates that: any affiliation or partnership with an outside organization that incorporates 91��ɫ’s brand property in its name or identification is subject to the prior review and President-Vice Presidents (PVP) approval.���� If the formal relationship changes or ends, the approver must ensure that the brand affiliation is removed.

10. Special Circumstances

10.1 Special circumstances will apply as follows:

a. Posters and notices relating to class instruction or other programmatic use of the teaching space are permitted on classroom or office doors but shall be removed by the end of the day or other relevant timeframe which must be identified on the poster or notice in conjunction with the contact name of the Poster or notice owner. In this case, the use of removeable tapes must be used to avoid damaging surfaces.

b. Temporary outdoor signage is permissible for event wayfinding and can be requisitioned through University Brand and Marketing in the Communications and Public Affairs Division of the University. These signs must be removed by the event staff once the event is completed.

c.. These Procedures do not apply to posters disseminated by the Department of Community Safety, the Department of Health, Safety and Employee Well-Being, Facilities Services, or other 91��ɫ authorities in an emergency or as required to ensure the effective and timely dissemination of information to the 91��ɫ community.

11. Complaints Regarding Poster Content or Location

11.1 Questions or complaints regarding poster content or posting location can be directed to the Office of Temporary Use of University Space at tuus@yorku.ca.

11.2 The Office of Temporary Use of University Space will direct complaints associated with staff, faculty, student organization, or external posters to the appropriate Senior Executive Officer for review and action up to and including directing the removal of posters found to be in contravention with the policy and associated procedures, rules, or guidelines.

12. Review

12.1 This procedure will be reviewed one year after implementation, and then every five years going forward. During the review, the Procedure will remain in full force and effect.

The post Posters, Procedure appeared first on Secretariat Policies.