FORT SMITH : Court affirms order on election challenge
Posted on Friday, March 7, 2008
URL: http://www.nwanews.com/adg/News/218918/
The state Supreme Court affirmed on Thursday a circuit judge’s order denying a challenge to the election of board of directors of a Buddhist temple.
The dispute centered on who should have been allowed to vote in an election in which rival groups sought control of the Wat Buddha Samakitham temple in Fort Smith.
An attorney for one group told the court last week in oral arguments that the circuit judge had improperly intervened in ecclesiastical law when he accepted a membership list put forward by the other group. But the attorney for the other side said membership was a factual issue for the judge to decide.
In 2005, a schism arose between two factions within the temple, with each alleging that it represented the true board of directors of the temple corporation, Justice Robert Brown wrote in the high court’s opinion.
Circuit Judge James Marschewski allowed attorneys for both sides to provide lists of people who would be allowed to vote for seven directors who would run the temple.
The circuit court initially believed that the factions would work together to arrange a mutually agreeable election, Brown wrote.
“This proved impossible, with the parties unable to agree on either an election date or a list of approved voters,” he wrote.
Marschewski asked both sides to provide a list of voters, and a master list was created, but the judge allowed anyone whose name didn’t appear on the list to file a provisional ballot. At the end of the election, Marschewski confirmed the results and the party whose faction lost the election moved to vacate the election results, citing various problems.
Marschewski denied the motion, and the group appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that by creating the master list of eligible voters the circuit court had “impermissibly imposed a secular definition of temple membership.” The group argued that allowing the use of provisional ballots prejudiced the voters whose names were not on the master list.
“Finding no prejudice to the appellants and holding that the circuit court used neutral principles in the conduct and approval of the election, we affirm the court’s order,” Brown wrote.
In the Supreme Court, the case is CA 2007-362, Somboun Viravonga (Khamla ) et al., Preecha Improm, Pan Hanshana, Terrakun Karnchanakphan, Thao Sayskoumane, Sy Lovan, Chintana Brandes, Pralongpole Kachenchai, Phra Sagob Parisanto, Sam K. Phonekhanan, Phra Bouaphan Prathphan, and Kahamnang Sayakoumane v. Wat Buddha Samakitham et. al, Oukham K. Khatthachanh, Bounsa Sisoukrath, Bouasay Keobounhome, Sam Siripoundsavath, and Oualayvanh Maymoundok.