Submission: GSA president not deserving of slander from funding controversy
By Josh Saidoff
Dec. 3, 2015 8:17 p.m.
Bullying should have no sanction. Not on our campus and not in our paper.
Nonetheless, over the past month, Graduate Students Association President Milan Chatterjee has been unjustly attacked, bullied and slandered in the pages of the Daily Bruin and on UCLA Listservs. Chatterjee’s actions in providing funding for the Diversity Caucus’ town hall have been criticized by groups that support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement as violating the First Amendment rights of students. He did no such thing. Chatterjee not only acted within the confines of university policy and the law, but did so in protection of the GSA and its mission.
The BDS movement has been a contentious campus topic for a few years now, and some in the UCLA administration have spoken out against it.
“I think the BDS movement, whatever the intent, the effect has been corrosive. And the fact that it’s focused on a single country is isolating to many of our students. It’s divisive,” said UCLA Chancellor Gene Block in an interview with the Jewish Journal.
With this in mind, the GSA Cabinet unanimously approved a resolution Oct. 24 under which “UCLA GSA – as a governing body – will abstain from taking any stances or engaging in any discussion in regards to Israel-Palestine politics.” This principled policy was adopted by a vote of 11 in favor to 0 against. Chatterjee cast just one of the votes, yet he, and only he, has been singled out for ridicule.
In October, Chatterjee received a request to co-sponsor an event with the Diversity Caucus. Chatterjee approved the funds but stipulated that they not be used to promote BDS. He explained to the Diversity Caucus representative that “Our cabinet does not want to co-program with Divest from Israel, as we believe we’ll be sponsoring a position that will alienate a substantial portion of our constituents. As I clarified to you over the phone, we also don’t want to co-program with any counter-organization to Divest from Israel, because that will alienate a significant portion of students, as well. GSA wants to remain neutral in Israel-Palestine politics, as described above.” The caucus representative acknowledged that this conversation took place, yet, when she selectively leaked documents to Students for Justice in Palestine, which turned them over to lawyers and the press, she conveniently did not leak this conversation.
GSA acted both correctly and within its rights when it refused to co-sponsor a BDS promotional event. Student groups have a right to free speech. However, GSA does not need to sponsor that speech with Cabinet funds. GSA operated both within the law, which was affirmed in a legal opinion from the American Center for Law & Justice and co-signed by a number of prominent Jewish organizations, and according to its own bylaws when it stated it would not fund an event pursuing a BDS agenda.
In the end, GSA funds were granted, the event took place and SJP was even allowed to operate a table. Nonetheless, SJP retained lawyers, issued a legal threat against Chatterjee and opinion pieces ran in the Daily Bruin calling for Chatterjee’s resignation.
Both the legal reasoning and the calls for Chatterjee’s resignation are tendentious. The GSA should not take sides on contentious Israeli-Palestinian politics. The GSA has a mission. It is to advance graduate student welfare, not narrow political agendas. Chatterjee is right to hold his ground. There’s a name for what is happening to him, and that is bullying. We can’t let the bullies win.
Saidoff is a graduate student in political science.
