From: Richard Meredith-Hardy 
Sent: 26 October 2010 14:25
To: 'Stephane Desprez'; 'Jean-Marc Badan'
Cc: Rene Verschueren; tormod.veiby; 'PATRICE GIRARDIN'; 'Jose Luis Esteban'; 'Robert Hughes'; 'Wolfgang Lintl'
Subject: CIMA Internal regulations

Dear Stephane

You will see at http://wiki.fai.org/x/wYAx I have loaded a draft 4 of proposed CIMA internal regulations.

In it, there is a new section (compared to earlier drafts) entitled    4         INTERNET OR EMAIL VOTES
                
I have subtitled this: “In accordance with the policy decided by the FAI Executive Board” since this was
the justification we were given by Max for a vote like this we had in CIMA 18 months ago.

But actually I have no true knowledge of what that policy is, or even when it was decided.  Can you
supply the actual wording please?

Note this Draft 4 of CIMA Internal Regulations is just a draft and this item may not even get past the
Working Group stage, but since the only solution to the problem “do we have a World Championships this
year or not?” could apparently only be solved in that 2008/9 occasion by an internet vote, and was very 
controversial at the time, then it should be something  which is defined (or specifically not permitted) 
in our internal regulations in case something like this ever happens again.

Regards

Richard Meredith-Hardy
CIMA President


==================================================


From: Stephane Desprez 
Sent: 28 October 2010 10:53
To: Richard Meredith-Hardy
Cc: Jean-Marc Badan; Rene Verschueren; tormod.veiby; PATRICE GIRARDIN; Jose Luis Esteban; 
Robert Hughes; Wolfgang Lintl
Subject: Re: CIMA Internal regulations

Dear Richard

As far as I could find out, there are no actual written rules and/or policies about email voting within 
FAI.   We do use email voting for Awards voted on by VPs (and as a VP you should have the corresponding 
emails) but there is no "legal" text that describes it.  For this particular case, the Constitution 
only says (BL 10.1.4.3): "FAI VPs will be invited ... by email voting. "Detailed rules ...will be 
decided by the FAI EB" 

The need to have an email vote in between Plenaries might indeed arise, as it did in April 2009, but 
it can very well be set up as it was by then (see attached letter and voting slip).  I've asked our 
lawyer and he actually told me that, for anything that was not happening during the Plenary, there 
was no requirement. It's up to the Bureau / EB (who has a delegation of power in between Plenary) 
to define the voting procedures, which can be either statutory (but it's dangerous), or defined on 
a as needed basis.

As far as I know, the Constitution never requires a Commission plenary to make a decision before the 
next meeting (but I don't yet master the constitution as long timers in FAI).  Powers seem to me 
explicitly transferred to the Bureau between meetings. So if a decision is needed, the Bureau is 
empowered, and can either decide it can take the decision alone, OR, if it feels the item is sensible, 
it can ask for an Internet Vote.  But the decision lies with the Bureau. 

To clearly incorporate an "internet voting" procedure within the Internal Regulation, for more than 
a very specific case (like Awards) is therefore somewhat "dangerous".  I think it would automatically 
diminishes the Bureau's prerogative, and slow down the decision process which, in our fast paced world, 
might be an issue.  I can envision that It might end-up in a situation where the Bureau is no longer 
able to make any decision, as any time something comes up, someone will invoke the "Internet Voting" 
rule. But to be honest I believe this discussion never occurred, and it might be worth having it.

With regards to the text proposed.  Please find enclosed our comments.

Don't hesitate to get back to us for further discussion
Yours in Sports
Stéphane   


==========================


From: Richard Meredith-Hardy
Sent: 28 October 2010 12:12
To: 'Stephane Desprez'
Cc: 'Jean-Marc Badan'; 'Rene Verschueren'; 'tormod.veiby'; 'PATRICE GIRARDIN'; 'Jose Luis Esteban'; 
'Robert Hughes'; 'Wolfgang Lintl'
Subject: RE: CIMA Internal regulations


Stephane

Thankyou for this, and your very detailed comments, very helpful.  

The whole business we had to go through 18 months ago when we were told by the incumbent SG this 
was what we had to do was extremely painful, divisive and  slow, not to mention time-consuming for 
Bureau as well as Secretariat, I expect they will tell you.  From my perspective it is quite simply 
something I would never willingly wish to repeat.

As there were questions at the time, I simply included it in my draft as a way of ‘formalizing’ 
the whole thing in case we were ever told again this is what we ‘must’ do.

But I understand your advice is that it should never be necessary.   Well that’s advice I’m more 
than happy to go along with,  and I shall delete the whole thing from my draft.

Thankyou!

Regards

Richard