RE: [gnso-osc-ops] Re: GCOT Documents: Voting, Term Limits, and Absences

["Ray Fassett" <ray@xxxxxxxxx>]

I don't think you can script into Rules of Procedural every possible case by
case scenario.  I would classify "incidental" as a concept that could be a
myriad of different possible reasons, case by case, with no way to script
for.  So the high level position I land is that the denominator does not
change in the instance of being absent for an incidental reason...which is
different than saying there must "always" be a remedy available for such
instances.  I am suggesting, as I think Avri is, that "always" does not
apply to the incidental reason for being absent...whereas # 6 below does say
that.  I am not in agreement with it, unless I am missing something
previously decided.

Ray



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-osc-ops@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 1:59 PM
To: gnso-osc-ops
Subject: [gnso-osc-ops] Re: GCOT Documents: Voting, Term Limits, and
Absences


Ken,

Are these the GCOT imperative/postions or your?

some comments:
On 31 Mar 2010, at 13:28, Ken Bour wrote:

> Ray and GCOT Members:
>  
> I would like to step through a few considerations to be sure that we are
looking at this absentee voting matter holistically. 
>  
> 1)  Two key principles underlying the GCOT's Abstentions procedures are:
>             a.  SG/Cs should not lose opportunities to have votes cast by
their Council representatives
>             b.  Voting denominators should never change; therefore,
remedies should always be available

a. is covered by the principle that all council members should attend all
meetings and that the exception should be rare.

b. 'alwasy' is a strong word.  When was 'always' decided by this group?  i
just saw that several of us agree that 'always' is not the requirement,
using terms like legitimate reasons or dire circumstance.


>  
> 2)  The team went to great lengths to ensure that the above principles
could be honored for:
>             Volitional Abstentions
>            Obligational Abstentions
>             Absences (new Section 3.8)
>             Vacancies (raised by S. Metalitz in Nairobi and captured in
the revised Section 3.8)
>            

and isn't this far enough?  i think it goes too far now that you point it
out this way.
...

>  
> 6)  Abstentions and associated remedies are permitted for all cases of
incidental absence.  If not, then each time a Councilor is absent, his/her
vote would not be cast and the SG/C's opportunity would be lost -- violating
a key principle.

it is not a key principle for this group.  it may be for you, but i do not
believe the group has accepted it.  any argument that depends on this being
a key principle is therefore not valid in my view.  

...

a.