The ISAF Constitution was not Respected

The selection between the RS:X and Kiteboarding was debated during the Mid-Year Council meeting on May 5, 2012. A number of delegates voiced their preference during debate, for one option or the other, and it was widely reported that those opinions played a role in the final tally. The ISAF Constitution allows such debates to take place, and we agree that this is a healthy component of the decision-making process. We take exception, however, with delegates who may have expressed an opinion without first consulting with the MNA’s in their particular Group, or in direct opposition with the official position of those MNA’s. We believe that this is a violation of Article 39 of the ISAF Constitution:

Members of the Council shall be persons who are active in Yachting. Members of the Council shall be responsible for placing before the Council the views of the Member National Authorities by whom they were nominated or elected but in the exercise of their votes they shall have regard to the interest of the sport of yachting throughout the world as a whole.
ISAF Constitution (Article 39 – p.11)
http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/2012ConstitutionWebsite-[12009].pdf

Gerardo Seeliger, delegate representing Group E (Federacao Portuguesa de Vela, Federacio Andorrana de Vela and Real Federacion Espanola de Vela) appears to have supported kiteboarding during debate against the position of the nations in his Group. Article 39 allowed Mr. Seeliger to vote for kiteboarding, but not to state that position publicly, and certainly not in front of the Council. Doing so gave other Council members the impression that there was more support for kiteboarding than there was in reality. This was not just unfair to the Nations in Group E – the RFEV quickly denounced that vote -, but to the ISAF Council as a whole.

Mr. Seeliger may not have been the only delegate to violate Article 39 (another possible violation was brought to light by the Federacion Mexicana de Vela in Group O), but in our opinion, his actions alone are sufficient to invalidate the vote.

Advertisements

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s