Official candidates in Madrid

Janus_Gersie wrote:

alex popoff wrote:

Heinz Eder wrote:
Generally that way of voting should be stopped in the future, associations can send votes by mail or letter, they don't need somebody with different nationality to raise hand.

We have a confusion here because we talk about a person which is not the official representative of his country (if I understood well )
But in all associative (and democrative) elections another person (official member) can represent you with your agreement !

Sorry Alex to bother you with a stupid question: I (being the official German representative) could also be delegate of Greece (considering they paid their membership fee and I got the official written order by them to vote for them) ?

Yes !

giufaz wrote:The statute doesn't say that the delegate must be a person of the same Country and French law doesn't prohibit to an associate to have as representatives foreign persons.
Furthermore, the statute prohibit to a delegate to be delegated by two members.
It seems therefore clear that any Member can delegate anybody according to it's internal statute and governance (decision of the internal BoD?) and that this delegate cannot vote also for another national association.
Reading the statute of FISTF I can share the concern of who think it is too soft and doesn't prevent litigations.
In my opinion it depend from the circumstance that it was created according to CIO rules, with the hope to be, before or later, federated as (for instance) FIFA.
The big mistake is that those kind of statutes have a system for solving conflicts that consist in going to the above federation to mediate. In our case we don't have any above federation and the solution of going into court is not efficient.
The statute, however, is simple and maybe old (as it not permit the use of electronic vote or meetings) but yet democratic (to limit the chance of delegation only to people of the nationality of the member woud notl have been so).
Best

In any case, a member (country) has the right to vote. Actually the Board didn't give us solutions to vote by letter , e-mail, phone ... So why not to give the delegation to an other official member ?
(only one delegation per country as written in the statutes). That's fair and the same for everybody !

Heinz Eder wrote:Alex, I don't think like that sorry.
I can only talk about the austrian example, I don't know the situation in other countries, but in Austria the association is registered and in the registry the names of the board members are listed.
If I call the austrian authority to make any change or want to ask them about any problems, they tell me that I'm not allowed to speak in the name of the association and they won't give me any additional information.

It's the same in France.

In my opinion the same should be valid for FISTF, at least the representant should be member of the association he represents, but then FISTF has to ask all its members to overtake that passus in their national statutes too. Every World or Continental federation has a set of statutes and they have to be implemented in the statutes of all its members before they are accepted as member. FISTF should go the same way, so there would be less problems, because then FISTF knows that rules are in all countries the same.

It's because we are an international organisation that you speak about nationalities ... but imagine you are in a local football club. One member who's not from your familly can represent you, or a child under 18 can be represented by one of it's parent ... there are different cases in the law about "associations 1901". But at the end the member has voted.

I also don't agree on your words that all associations who pay should be allowed to vote.

It's the law ! If again, you are member of your tennis club or football club why you shouldn't have the right to vote ?

In combination with your view on things that associations can be represented by an external this is very dangerous don't you think?

No, if you trust at that person (or member). For the elections of the French Republic President you can send one person who can vote for you ... It's like that in France.

Somebody pays 200 EUR for 2 associations, where he knows people, they send him a letter that he can represent those associations and then he has 3 votes for what(who) ever?
In my opinion (and I also think that the statutes are written like that) it is not enough only to pay 100 EUR.

Be careful ! Normally are members only those who have paid before the end of the period (the Board send us a notice by mail in October). I think we had one month to pay. We received a receipt by FISTF Accountant.

I agree with you that those associations which were members of FISTF at the last Congress are still member as long as they paid or pay the membership fee or they didn't withdraw officially their membership. If there are associations which were not and pay now 100 EUR they can only be provisional member and those members don't have a vote at a congress.

We are ok on that and I think it's written on the Statutes!

I totally agree with Giufaz (thanks once again!!)

So, in short Papakonstantinou can certainly vote for Argentina if he has the papers that prove he truly represents them.

Does Papakonstantinou is the official Greek delegate who's first going to vote for Greece ? if No, he can't represent an other country.

All the same, Greece can be represented by any person who is there, as long as that person has an official delegation signed by PATFAP BoD members, no matter if that person is a member of PATFAP or even a foreigner.

Not any person ! only the official member of one other nation !

Italian Forum.

Stefano De Francesco question and answer Giulio Fazio. Excuse, is in Italian, but not translated


Volevo chiedere a Giulio (Giufaz) alcune chiarificazioni relative al prossimo Congresso di Madrid:

1) Voto Postale - Dato che lo statuto FISTF prevede espressamente la possibilità di voto postale ma che questo è in contrasto con un altra norma statutaria che permette di presentarsi sino al giorno stesso delle elezioni, volevo chiedere se esiste un modo per consentire entrambe le opzioni o quale debba essere il criterio da adottare in casi del genere.

A mio avviso e per prudenza, visto che alcuni dei partecipanti andranno a madrid (o sceglieranno di non partecipare) solo per cercare ragioni per impugnare le delibere prese, il voto per posta dovrebbe esser permesso (anche se le modalità di votazione lo rendono difficile o inutile). Per consentire tale esercizio andrebbe richiesto alle associazioni nazionali di trasmettere il voto in tempo per lo svolgimento del congresso. I voti giunti oltre tempo massimo non verranno presi in considerazione. Occorrerà, inoltre, specificare che il voto varrà ai fini del ballottaggio solo se il candidato presidente si sarà collocato al primo o secondo posto al termine del primo turno elettorale e a meno che l'associazione non abbia espressamente indicato che il voto non vale in caso di ballottaggio.
Il voto dovrebbe esser espresso trasmettendo un plico nel quale il rappresentante dell'associazione, a ciò delegato dal suo Board, dichiara di esprimere il suo voto scrivendo il nome del candidato prescelto a stampatello in un foglio bianco a4 piegato in modo da esser inserito all'interno di una busta bianca all'esterno della quale viene indicata la carica per la quale si intende votare. Chi ad esempio vuole come presidente Paolo Cuccu e come direttore allo Sport Maurizio Lepri scriverà in ciascun foglio a4 i nomi di ognuno dei prescelti, ponendo poi il foglio con su scritto Paolo Cuccu dentro una busta bianca con su scritto presidente ed il foglio con su scritto maurizio lepri dentro una busta bianca con su scritto sport director.
Ripeto, l'arrivo tardivo delle buste alla segreteria organizzativa non sarà in alcun modo imputabile alla fistf (che però deve indicare le modalità di voto in tempo).

2) Ordine nella elezione delle cariche - Ne esiste una visto che lo statuto le elenca in sequenza?

Lo statuto non indica un ordine. Visto che non è previsto un voto per liste, l'unico modo per votare è procedere carica per carica secondo l'ordine indicato nello statuto. Al termine dell'elezione, per evitare confusione o di dover ripetere le elezioni, andrà chiesto al candidato se accetta la carica ed in caso negativo si potrà procedere a nuova elezione (per evitare che la scelta del sostituto venga rimessa al solo presidente una volta terminata l'assemblea a causa di dimissioni dettate da sola strategia elettorale).

3) Candidature multiple - Sono possibili?

Lo statuto non lo vieta e, dunque, sono possibili. Ovviamente il candidato eletto ad una carica e che abbia accettato l'elezione non potrà esser votato per le cariche successive, vista l'incompatibilità per il possesso di più cariche.

4) Deleghe a membri di altri paesi - Sono possibili?

Si, lo statuto non le vieta. Ogni delegato, però, non potrà avere più di una delega. La delega non può, inoltre, esser data ai membri del board della fistf in carica.

5) Stante la situazione di incertezza che regna in Grecia e stante il fatto che ad oggi non sia stata comunicato alla FISTF il dispositivo della sentenza, come rapportarci rispetto alla delegazione greca?

Il dispositivo della sentenza è valido se tale è considerato in Grecia (e mi pare di capire che così è). Il potere di scegliere il delegato, a meno di previsioni diverse dello statuto greco, spetta al loro provisional board che dovrà deliberare in merito. Non conosco quale maggioranza preveda lo statuto greco, ma riterrei importante che, per evitare future contestazioni, il board greco esprimesse il delegato con il consenso più ampio possibile (meglio se all'unanimità). Se questo non dovesse accadere il board della fistf prima della votazione esaminerà la documentazione prodotta e valuterò se il board è stato convocato regolarmente ed il voto espresso secondo statuto e legge. In caso di dubbio (si tratta di diritto greco) potrà non ammettere il delegato al voto.

alex popoff wrote:
Does Papakonstantinou is the official Greek delegate who's first going to vote for Greece ? if No, he can't represent an other country.

Not any person ! only the official member of one other nation !

Sorry Alex, maybe we are reading a different version of the Statute.
Where do you read that only a delegate of a Country can represent another country? In the version I have it seems the contrary.
And where do you see that a delegate can vote for two Countries?
I'm trying to read the statute in order to help the situation but unfortunatelly sometimes I see some idea in the forum that I cannot confirm in the stature I h ave. I therefore will be grateful if you can help.
Best

drastis wrote:
I totally agree with Giufaz (thanks once again!!)

So, in short Papakonstantinou can certainly vote for Argentina if he has the papers that prove he truly represents them. All the same, Greece can be represented by any person who is there, as long as that person has an official delegation signed by PATFAP BoD members, no matter if that person is a member of PATFAP or even a foreigner.

Thanks Drastis,

It is correct.
Of course it will need to verify with the due care the power of attorney that every delegate will show in Madrid.
Best

I only know what our (Finnish Association) statutes say. It is fully legitimate if we (the board) give our mandate to somebody to represent us in the EGM. There is nothing written in our statutes that the representative should be our member. This is fully understandable as it might be in our interests to give the mandate for instance to a lawyer. Why should he/she be our member?

As far as I understand the FISTF statutes, the following issues should be clear:

One delegate can represent only one member nation: "9-4 No Delegate shall represent more than one Member."

Mr. Catania and Mr. Collins cannot be delegates of their National Associations: "9-5 During the term of their mandate, the members of the Board of Directors shall not be appointed as Delegate by their National Association."

We (Finland) should be allowed to vote in the elections by using a postal vote: "9-6 It shall be possible for Members to use postal vote."

We can give our mandate to whoever we want to represent our association as a delegate: "9-1 Membership of the Congress shall consist of one Delegate per Member and of the members of the Board of Directors." I could not find any (other than above) mentions about restrictions of a Delegate.

zinga wrote:I only know what our (Finnish Association) statutes say. It is fully legitimate if we (the board) give our mandate to somebody to represent us in the EGM. There is nothing written in our statutes that the representative should be our member. This is fully understandable as it might be in our interests to give the mandate for instance to a lawyer. Why should he/she be our member?

As far as I understand the FISTF statutes, the following issues should be clear:

One delegate can represent only one member nation: "9-4 No Delegate shall represent more than one Member."

Mr. Catania and Mr. Collins cannot be delegates of their National Associations: "9-5 During the term of their mandate, the members of the Board of Directors shall not be appointed as Delegate by their National Association."

We (Finland) should be allowed to vote in the elections by using a postal vote: "9-6 It shall be possible for Members to use postal vote."

We can give our mandate to whoever we want to represent our association as a delegate: "9-1 Membership of the Congress shall consist of one Delegate per Member and of the members of the Board of Directors." I could not find any (other than above) mentions about restrictions of a Delegate.

So do I...I read the same in the FISTF stature.
Thanks and best

Giulio, I believe the problem is the translation. Alex uses the french version. I have understood that the problem is the translation from french to english. Alex wrote previously that some terms like delegate or member (I don't remember exactly) don't have the same meaning in french.

If the translation was not done by a professional with knowledge of this vocabulary, then it is more than possible. Another big problem to correct in the future. But if they are not compatible versions, which is the correct one?

Anyway, it would be good if people would quote the part of the statutes they refer to. Like Zinga did above.

giufaz wrote:

alex popoff wrote:
Does Papakonstantinou is the official Greek delegate who's first going to vote for Greece ? if No, he can't represent an other country.

Not any person ! only the official member of one other nation !

Sorry Alex, maybe we are reading a different version of the Statute.
Where do you read that only a delegate of a Country can represent another country? In the version I have it seems the contrary.
And where do you see that a delegate can vote for two Countries?
I'm trying to read the statute in order to help the situation but unfortunatelly sometimes I see some idea in the forum that I cannot confirm in the stature I h ave. I therefore will be grateful if you can help.
Best

alex popoff wrote:

Janus_Gersie wrote:

alex popoff wrote:We have a confusion here because we talk about a person which is not the official representative of his country (if I understood well )
But in all associative (and democrative) elections another person (official member) can represent you with your agreement !

Sorry Alex to bother you with a stupid question: I (being the official German representative) could also be delegate of Greece (considering they paid their membership fee and I got the official written order by them to vote for them) ?

Yes !

I think I got what you would like to express, BUT:

Art. 9
9-1 Membership of the Congress shall consist of one Delegate per Member and of the members of the Board of Directors.
9-2 ....
9-3 Each Member shall have one vote at the Congress. The members of the Board of Directors shall not have a vote.
9-4 No Delegate shall represent more than one Member.
9-5 .....
9-6 It shall be possible for Members to use postal vote.

That means clearly to me I am not able to vote for Greece (just as an example) because the word "Delegate" is explained in Art. 9-1. That makes Art. 9-4 even clearer.
"One delegate per member" says to me: I can represent Germany. I am the delegate of Germany.
Additionally Art. 9-4 limits my right to vote ONLY for Germany.
Alex, where do you get from that I would be able to vote for another country ???? Sorry, you are confusing me !

Janus

Janus,

A delegate can be a total outsider. Like a local lawyer who is sent to follow that everything goes according to the rules. The important thing is that the delegate does not act independently and knows the thoughts of the the association (or other) which he is delegated for. Below is a small quote from wikipedia (it had the best text for quoting here with a quick search) about delegates.

"A delegate is a person who speaks or acts on behalf of an organization (e.g., a government, a charity, an NGO, or a trade union) at a meeting or conference between organizations of the same level (e.g., trade talks or an environmental summit between governments; an arbitration over an industrial dispute; or a meeting of student unions from individual colleges at a national student union conference). Generally, but not always, delegates differ from representatives because they receive and carry out instructions from the group that sends them, and, unlike representatives, are not expected to act independently."

The difference between a representative and delegates is interesting in the case of Madrid, because being a delegate means the person has to know and fulfill only those tasks and speak of those opinions that are given to him by an association. A delegate can't speak about his own opinions if they are not confirmed by the association. And all actions by the delegate are the responsibility of the association.

If the delegate does not know, or does not follow, the instructions given to him, he will no doubt act outside his powers, but that is between the delegate and the association.

For me it means that for example for Finland it would be useless to send a representative outside of our country, because no one from other countries knows the exact way we think about these matters, and so the voting would be the only task, and can be done by post.

I don't know if the statutes should talk about representatives or delegates, because the difference seems to exist. Probably another thing to clarify for the new statutes.

Janus according to the articles you selected to present, there is the possibility for someone to be delegate of a country as long as this very person is NOT a delegate for another country also. So, YOU cannot be a delegate of Greece, since you are a delegate for Germany, but Papakonstantinou CAN be a delegate for Argentina as long as he is NOT a delegate for Greece. All the same, mr Vulpes or any other German CAN be a delegate for Greece since he is NOT a delegate for Germany. According to the articles you referred to, Koutroumanos CANNOT be a delegate for Greece because he is a member of FISTF BoD.

Giufaz, am I right?

Let me as Vicepresident of DSTFB vote for Germany via mail

Thossa wrote:Let me as Vicepresident of DSTFB vote for Germany via mail

Are you kidding??

I have been sending messages to Piero Capponi, but lately I get no answers. Does anyone know if Piero is OK?? Piero are you still there?

Alan Collins is standing for president of FISTF.

For sure, as long as Catania will be the only other cadidate, Alan will get the belgian vote.

von K. wrote:Janus,

A delegate can be a total outsider. Like a local lawyer who is sent to follow that everything goes according to the rules. The important thing is that the delegate does not act independently and knows the thoughts of the the association (or other) which he is delegated for. Below is a small quote from wikipedia (it had the best text for quoting here with a quick search) about delegates.

"A delegate is a person who speaks or acts on behalf of an organization (e.g., a government, a charity, an NGO, or a trade union) at a meeting or conference between organizations of the same level (e.g., trade talks or an environmental summit between governments; an arbitration over an industrial dispute; or a meeting of student unions from individual colleges at a national student union conference). Generally, but not always, delegates differ from representatives because they receive and carry out instructions from the group that sends them, and, unlike representatives, are not expected to act independently."

The difference between a representative and delegates is interesting in the case of Madrid, because being a delegate means the person has to know and fulfill only those tasks and speak of those opinions that are given to him by an association. A delegate can't speak about his own opinions if they are not confirmed by the association. And all actions by the delegate are the responsibility of the association.

If the delegate does not know, or does not follow, the instructions given to him, he will no doubt act outside his powers, but that is between the delegate and the association.

For me it means that for example for Finland it would be useless to send a representative outside of our country, because no one from other countries knows the exact way we think about these matters, and so the voting would be the only task, and can be done by post.

I don't know if the statutes should talk about representatives or delegates, because the difference seems to exist. Probably another thing to clarify for the new statutes.

In the absence of informations, I understand that the only official thing we are going for, to Madrid, is "the election of a new Board".
I imagine that discussions about everything will take place but there will be not officially recognized because nowhere the word "Congress" appear. Again one other mistake of the provisionnal Board ...

For the elections : in theory no more than 16 votes must appear in total, because there are 16 member countries in the FISTF. (of course to be member means the country has paid his annual membership for 2010-2011).
So no more than 16 persons (representatives) can vote if each one represent his own country.
In case a country will not send a representative in Madrid, it can choice one of the foreign representatives who will be there. At that moment, the chosen representative becomes also a "delegate".
And again, the total of representatives + delegates votes must not be more than 16.
Ex: 8 countries present (8 votes) and all have 1 delegation (= 8 votes) =16
That is an example of what a valid election could be, according to the FISTF statutes (with the article "no more than one delegate per country").

BUT ! that article which says "no more than one delegate per country" is not valid with the spirit of Democracy and with the obligation that every member (nation) has the right to vote.
Here is an exemple : if only 7 countries will be present (=7 votes) and each receive one delegation (+7 votes) we have a total of 14 !!!
At the end 2 Countries will not vote, and elections will be not valid because the rule of "every member has the right to vote" is not respected !
And there are others exemples which cannot permit all the countries to vote ...
It's why the article is not valid in the spirit of general rules of elections and a big mistake in our statutes ! there musn't be a limitation of delegation for one member !

drastis wrote:Janus according to the articles you selected to present, there is the possibility for someone to be delegate of a country as long as this very person is NOT a delegate for another country also. So, YOU cannot be a delegate of Greece, since you are a delegate for Germany, but Papakonstantinou CAN be a delegate for Argentina as long as he is NOT a delegate for Greece. All the same, mr Vulpes or any other German CAN be a delegate for Greece since he is NOT a delegate for Germany. According to the articles you referred to, Koutroumanos CANNOT be a delegate for Greece because he is a member of FISTF BoD.

Giufaz, am I right?

Assuming that all positions you are referring to are correct (I don't know who will be the delegate for each Country and who are the BoD members still in force) you are correct.
Best

for your information
See .pdf here

maxischn wrote:for your information
See .pdf here

Very good initiative and good luck !

drastis wrote:Janus according to the articles you selected to present, there is the possibility for someone to be delegate of a country as long as this very person is NOT a delegate for another country also. So, YOU cannot be a delegate of Greece, since you are a delegate for Germany, but Papakonstantinou CAN be a delegate for Argentina as long as he is NOT a delegate for Greece. All the same, mr Vulpes or any other German CAN be a delegate for Greece since he is NOT a delegate for Germany. According to the articles you referred to, Koutroumanos CANNOT be a delegate for Greece because he is a member of FISTF BoD.

Giufaz, am I right?

I'm not sure you use the right words on your exemples (representant/delegate), but there's no sense if the President of a country vote for one person and the Secretary of that same country vote for an other one. It's why two persons of the same country cannot vote !
Only the official representant of a country can vote for his country, and be a delegate for an other one (which can't be physicaly present at the voting ceremony).

Good luck, Markus!

I also sent my candidacy forward a few moments ago. I couldn't find an official form anywhere, so I did it by email (with copies to some selected recipients to have confirmation).

I'll candidate for the position of President. I will explain my candidature and reasons for choosing to candidate for this position when I publish my program (also here) in a couple of days. But most people here know my opinions and views on many things. I'm happy to answer all questions, too.

von K. wrote:Good luck, Markus!

I also sent my candidacy forward a few moments ago. I couldn't find an official form anywhere, so I did it by email (with copies to some selected recipients to have confirmation).

I'll candidate for the position of President. I will explain my candidature and reasons for choosing to candidate for this position when I publish my program (also here) in a couple of days. But most people here know my opinions and views on many things. I'm happy to answer all questions, too.

What a good initiative !!! Good luck to you !!!

Janus_Gersie wrote:

Art. 9
9-1 Membership of the Congress shall consist of one Delegate per Member and of the members of the Board of Directors.
9-2 ....
9-3 Each Member shall have one vote at the Congress. The members of the Board of Directors shall not have a vote.
9-4 No Delegate shall represent more than one Member.
9-5 .....
9-6 It shall be possible for Members to use postal vote.

That means clearly to me I am not able to vote for Greece (just as an example) because the word "Delegate" is explained in Art. 9-1. That makes Art. 9-4 even clearer.
"One delegate per member" says to me: I can represent Germany. I am the delegate of Germany.
Additionally Art. 9-4 limits my right to vote ONLY for Germany.
Alex, where do you get from that I would be able to vote for another country ???? Sorry, you are confusing me !

Janus

Janus,
your reading of the statute is absolutely right. The rest is only confusion and I hope that this will not bring somebody to loose the chance to vote in Madrid.
Best