Stížnost na průběh hlasování v rámci PPI GA 2012

[Tomas.Vymazal]

S Marcelem jsme vcera vecer vypracovali nasledujici stiznost na prubeh hlasovani v ramci druheho dne valneho shromazdeni Piratske internacionaly a nasledne jsme ji odeslali na email Court of Arbitration a mailing list PP-leaders.

Dear Court of Arbitration:

Please, let us bring to your attention our doubts about the overall
proceedings of the General Assembly of the Pirate Parties
International on the 15th of April, 2012:

(i) The General Assembly did not agree upon the agenda for the meeting.

(ii) The General Assembly did not adopt the Rules of Procedure as is
mandatory according to IX(6) of the Statutes.

(iii) During the course of the meeting, there was a motion saying
"Ballots are numbered thus not secret, do we continue with the
proposed system, which is public for both remote as local
participants" with result of 9/9 - Y/N.
Based on aforementioned result moderator assumed that the elections
were supposed to be held secretly. However, this was valid only in
case secret voting was the default way.

(iv) The original rules for the board members elections stated that
each candidate had to receive more than half of the total votes
(approval voting) but after only 3 out of 5 candidates reached this
threshold, a new round of voting followed which yielded no candidate
passing the threshold.
When that happened, the moderator called for a motion to accept two of
the candidates who received the most votes as board members. This was
voted publicly, which is inconsistent with the assumed decision on
secret voting.

(v) During the elections of the alternate board members, when there
was a tie between the candidates, a public voting followed to
determine which of them would be considered second and third
respectively. This is inconsistent with the assumed decision on secret
voting.

Taking into account the facts mentioned above, the Czech Pirate Party
asks the Court of Arbitration of the Pirate Parties International to
decide on the following:

I) Whether the results of the General Assembly are valid.
II) Whether the motions passed at said General Assembly are valid.
III) Whether the board members elections are valid.
IV) What the default way of voting at the General Assembly is, whether
secret or public.


On behalf of the Czech Pirate Party,

Tomáš Vymazal
Head of the International Relations dept.

Budu sem postupne pridavat informace o dalsim vyvoji.

[Vitezslav.Praks]

Ahoj, jak pořad jednání, tak jednací řád se myslím přijímaly (ačkoliv jsem u toho nebyl). Toto podání mi přijde právně poněkud pomílené (předběžnou otázkou nelze zpochybňovat platnost právního aktu, způsob hlaosvání nemá na přijaté rozhodnutí žádný vliv a konečně jednací řád se přijímá pokaždé znovu jiný, tedy otázka na "default" nastavení hlasování je nesmyslná) a z hlediska zahraniční politiky nepromyšlené. Byl bych rád, kdyby se takové věci příště připravovaly přes fórum, aby se k nim mohli všichni vyjádřit a ne takto zbrkle, když k tomu není žádný reálný důvod.

[Ivan.Bartos]

Kverulant

[Tomas.Vymazal]

Ahoj, jak pořad jednání, tak jednací řád se myslím přijímaly (ačkoliv jsem u toho nebyl). Toto podání mi přijde právně poněkud pomílené (předběžnou otázkou nelze zpochybňovat platnost právního aktu, způsob hlaosvání nemá na přijaté rozhodnutí žádný vliv a konečně jednací řád se přijímá pokaždé znovu jiný, tedy otázka na "default" nastavení hlasování je nesmyslná) a z hlediska zahraniční politiky nepromyšlené. Byl bych rád, kdyby se takové věci příště připravovaly přes fórum, aby se k nim mohli všichni vyjádřit a ne takto zbrkle, když k tomu není žádný reálný důvod.

Jestli je tomu jak rikas, mela o tom byt alespon zminka v zapisu. V zapisu o poradu jednani ani jednacim radu neni ani slovo, takze neni odkud tuto informaci ziskat.

[Tomas.Vymazal]

Dalsi vyvoj v pp-leaders listu (serazeno podle casu odeslani uvedeneho v hlavicce mailu - nektere maily zrejme nebyly zaslany na pp-leaders a dostaly se tam az citaci od Artura):

As expected, total neglect on this intervention.
Is there ANY stance on this matter?

Sorry to jump into the conversation,

but Tom's mail was addressed to CoA and as every
Court has a rule of not commenting an open case,
I would assume that this is true for the PPI CoA as
well.
The first statement you should expect from them is
when they issue a ruling.

Proper proceedings are:

1.) Inform the parties of the entry of the matter at hand.
2.) Request information from the parties involved.

Before that there shall be no ruling at all. I want to insist here becase because this was ignored before. Since the GA is involed at the matter at hand, the GA must be informed.

I am sure the CoA can do that, they showed a very well reasoned ruling on the GA in Prague and they also have written proceedings now.

The request of the Czech Pirates is not so clear, what they exactly want to achieve - is the idea to invalidate all elections and votings?

IMHO for the matter at hand looks like as the parties involed are:

PPCZ vs. PPI GA

According to the Proceedures of the CoA the coordinator will solicit a defending script - Who will represent the GA in this matter?

I understand the intervention of the Czech Pirates, the proceedings at the GA was absolutly inappropriate and probably most elections would be invalid in a proper court. But we have a vested interest to have a working ppi. Therefore we didnt complain - but now since there is a the CoA involved anyway - it is of very important to follow the rules of due procedure. We will follow the proceedings very closely.

Request to the COA

If the Court does not see the PPI GA involved as a party and therefore will not send all the required documentation to all involed parties. The Pirate Party Switzerland requests to be accepted to be a joint plaintiff with the PPCZ.

Regards,
Thomas Bruderer,
President Pirate Party Switzerland

> Hello all
>
> I would like to jump in also
>
> I agree with the PP-CH that we all a vested interest to have a working
> ppi. It is true that the proceedings of the GA was a little bit messy,
> in spite of the best efforts of most of the people present to make it
> happen in the given timeframe, but none of the motion is specifically
> challenged (except the admitance of PP-CAT because of a statute issue,
> not related to the GA).
>
> I would like to point that this GA elected the current CoA. So it
> would be inapropriate for the current CoA to rule on it's own election
> (conflict of interest). On top of it, if the current CoA invalidates
> the GA, then the CoA is invalid as well as all it's ruling, including
> the invalidation of the GA. This is recursivity.
>
> The logical approach would be to ask the previous CoA to rule on the
> validity of the GA. The logic of the thing would be, as a general
> rule, that the scope of the CoA does not end on the GA, but is
> extended to include the GA and it's aftermath, precisely to be able to
> rule on it's validity, and, after such deliberation, to hand-over it's
> arbitration role to the newly elected CoA.
>
> If this makes sense, then the request of the PP-CZ should be sent to
> the previous CoA by the PP-CZ itself. Let's see what they would have
> to say.
>
>
> Best regards

Dear Tom,

I acknowledge the reception of your complaint on behalf of the Court of
Arbitration.

Regards,

Maxime Rouquet

> Hi all,
>
> Hear are the four possible outcomes I can see if we pursue this through
> the Court of Arbitration:-
>
> If the current CoA rules it is valid – there is a conflict of interest
> issue;
> If the current CoA rules it is invalid – then their decision is invalid
> as they weren't properly elected;
> If the previous CoA rules it is valid – then their decision is invalid
> as they weren't elected to deal with this complaint;
> If the previous CoA rules it is invalid – then the entire 2012
> Conference was a waste of time.
>
> Regards,
> Mozart
>
> --
> Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer
> Member of the Court of Arbitration
> Pirate Parties International

Indeed rather messy...

How about the former CoA rules on whether the election of the new CoA
was valid and then if this is true then the new CoA could rule on the
rest? (and otherwise the old CoA could rule on the rest)

Regards,

Arturo

[Marcel.Kolaja]

@Jakub: Důvod byl. Chtěli jsme to podat bez zbytečného odkladu. Ale souhlasím, že v ideálním případě bychom to měli připravit na fóru.

Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 01:48:22 +0200
From: Tom Vymazal <tom.vymazal@gmail.com>
To: Gregory Engels <Gregory.Engels@piratenpartei-hessen.de>
Cc: pp-leaders.discussion@lists.pp-international.net, coa@pp-international.net
Subject: Re: [pp-leaders.discussion] [pp-leaders] Public complaint about the proceedings of the GA

Hi Gregory,

I am sorry, but these things should be in the minutes. Also, I cannot
play that video, because I don't have flash and it's not available in
HTML5 version. That's possibly one of the reasons, why such things
should be in the minutes.

We are Pirates, not savages. If we want to succeed, we should learn to
play by the rules which make sense and change those that don't.

Such complaints as this one are probably the only way to teach
ourselves to do our jobs properly.

In the Czech Pirate Party, we've got loads of these situations where
complaints are being filed because of various things. Thanks to that
we're becoming more and more precise in the things that are to be
embraced in the "facist" part of democracy (like various limits and
other rules) and people are also learning that things aren't always
black and white and that maybe not all of the politicians are
corrupted idiots, but cannot do something simply because they lack the
capacity to do so (just look at how long it's gonna take the COA to
rule on this simple complaint and how is the ruling gonna look,
whether strict and straight forward or forgiving and impotent).

All the best,

Tom Vymazal
Head of International Relations dept.,
The Czech Pirate Party

Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:04:04 +0200
From: Marcel Kolaja <marcel.kolaja@pirati.cz>
To: "Baptiste Marcel (harpalos@partipirate.org)" <harpalos@partipirate.org>
Cc: pp-leaders.discussion@lists.pp-international.net, coa@pp-international.net
Subject: Re: [pp-leaders.discussion] [CAP] [pp-leaders] Public complaint about the proceedings of the GA
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Tue, May 08, 2012 at 09:58:51AM +0100, Baptiste Marcel (harpalos@partipirate.org) wrote:

> If this makes sense, then the request of the PP-CZ should be sent to
> the previous CoA by the PP-CZ itself. Let's see what they would have
> to say.

I really don't think we need to make it more complicated than it actually
is. The current COA is in place. All motions are valid unless stated
otherwise and the COA can come up with a ruling. If the COA invalidates
the GA, it doesn't necessarily mean that all actions (like COA rulings)
would be invalidated retrospectively. So, such a scenario would have
probably invalidated the COA for the future, but not for the decisions
they already had done in the past. The file is at the COA, so just let
them work. Thanks!

> Baptiste Marcel << Harpalos >>


Regards,

Marcel Kolaja http://marcel.volipiraty.cz/
Czech Pirate Party International Coordinator http://www.pirati.cz/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when
we created them." -- Albert Einstein

_______________________________________________
pp-leaders.discussion mailing list
pp-leaders.discussion@lists.pp-international.net
http://lists.pp-international.net/listi ... discussion

Tome, máme nějaké zprávy od COA nebo od PP-CH. Akceptovalo COA PP-CH jako spolužalobce?


Zdraví

[Tomas.Vymazal]

Nevim o jakekoliv oficialni reakci krome toho potvrzeni, ze to COA prijalo, mam z toho podivny pocit.

BTW: Jsem nouma, napsal jsem corrupted misto corrupt

[Marcel.Kolaja]

Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 19:28:31 +0200
From: Marcel Kolaja <marcel.kolaja@pirati.cz>
To: coa@pp-international.net
Cc: pp-leaders.discussion@lists.pp-international.net, Tom Vymazal <tomas.vymazal@piratskastrana.cz>
Subject: Re: [pp-leaders.discussion] [pp-leaders] Public complaint about the proceedings of the GA
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

We haven't been contacted by the COA yet apart from the initial
acknowledgment of the complaint reception. We're quite concerned about it,
as it's been more than 2 months since we filed the complaint.

We would like to slightly extend the complaint with:

III.2) Whether the board alternates elections are valid.
III.3) Whether the COA elections are valid.

Thanks!


Regards,

Marcel Kolaja http://marcel.volipiraty.cz/
Czech Pirate Party International Coordinator http://www.pirati.cz/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Time to rename 2.4.10 to 2.5.0? " -- Pavel Machek

_______________________________________________
pp-leaders.discussion mailing list
pp-leaders.discussion@lists.pp-international.net
http://lists.pp-international.net/listi ... discussion

[Marcel.Kolaja]

Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 13:32:50 +1000
From: Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer <mozart.palmer@pp-international.net>
To: Marcel Kolaja <marcel.kolaja@pirati.cz>
Cc: coa@pp-international.net, pp-leaders.discussion@lists.pp-international.net, Tom Vymazal <tomas.vymazal@piratskastrana.cz>
Subject: Re: [pp-leaders] Public complaint about the proceedings of the GA
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)

Hi Marcel,

Apologies from the CoA for not dealing with this as promptly as
everyone would like, myself included. I’m sure you can appreciate that
the CoA has had a lot of work to do since April. We are already one
person down and Maxime has had to handle the French elections.

Things seem to be back on track and we will try to deliver a ruling as
soon as possible. I think the entire CoA is a bit overwhelmed by the
sheer volume of complaints that have had to be dealt with so far.

Yours sincerely,
Mozart

--
Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer
Press Officer, Pirate Party Australia
Court of Arbitration, Pirate Parties International
W: www.olbrychtpalmer.net
T: @OlbrychtPalmer

[Ivan.Sirko]

Dnes, pravděpodobně rezignoval Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer. Mohl by Vojta nějak komentovat situace v CoA?

Fellow Pirates,
>>
>> I hereby resign from the PPI Court of Arbitration. I have already
>> informed the Board and CoA of my decision.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> --
>> Mozart Olbrycht-Palmer
>> Deputy Secretary and Press Officer
>> Pirate Party Australia

Děkují!