The adviser to the Student Government Association said Thursday that a clerical error occurred when someone changed the group’s constitution to reflect passage of an amendment that had not received the required level of support.

After The Crimson White reported a discrepancy between copies of the SGA constitution on several UA-hosted Web sites, the SGA conducted a review to ensure the published document aligned with what the document should say.

In a version of its constitution the SGA posted on its Web site on Jan. 26, a petition signed by 20 percent of the student body was required to initiate impeachment proceedings against one of the organization’s officials.

However, two other copies of the document on other UA Web sites said that a petition only had to be signed by a total of six students to begin a preliminary investigation.

Chad Clark, UA director of student engagement and an adviser to the SGA, described the SGA’s “thorough” internal review process in an e-mail Thursday night.

Clark said he worked with UA administrators and SGA Attorney General Aubrey Coleman to compare the constitution to all amendments offered since 2002 to ensure they had received the necessary electoral support to pass an amendment. The constitution requires that two-thirds of voters participating in an election support an amendment for it to pass.

In his e-mail, Clark said that there was a vote on an amendment in 2004 to mandate a petition signed by 20 percent of the enrolled student body. While the amendment received majority support, it did not meet the standard set by the constitution to take effect.

“We assume that the amendment was added accidentally during a subsequent constitutional review based on the majority ‘yes’ vote,” Clark said.

Clark added that the SGA had confirmed that all other amendments added to the constitution since 2002 “were added to the constitution correctly and accurately.”