This post only expresses the opinion of the authors and signatories (Wessel, Ezekiel, Lea, Pedrojuán)
(The following message has been send to the CC:)
Dear members of the CC,
We would like to request of formal statement by the CC as well as a response towards solving the following issue:
At the moment, none of the proposals (except for the “status quo / no” proposal) that will be put forward for the November 1 vote comply with the regulations set down in section 6 of the Organising Principles (OPs).
Reasons for this are:
- None of the proposals has the formal support of either 10% of the DiEM25 membership or 30 out of a 100 VC members
- None of the proposals will have been sent to the VC before the November 1 vote after which the VC can reject the proposal or ask for “further refinements”
- The current setup of the vote (50%+ majority) does not comply with the regulations, for in that case the conditions for any proposal to pass would be 60% super-majority and at least 50% of the eligible members casting their vote
Even though we understand the practical difficulties this brings about, we believe not complying with these rules is far more damaging than facing these difficulties. Why?
- To respect the statement in the OPs: “Amendments of the Manifesto and of DiEM25’s Organising Principles must be a carefully designed and implemented process, lest DiEM25’s character and mission are inadvertently damaged”
- To respect the basic democratic rules that the entire movement agreed with at the moment the OPs were inaugurated
- To make sure the integrity of DiEM25 as a movement is not damaged. A movement that has “democracy” in its name that is operating outside of its own democratic rules does not present itself as an integer organisation
Luckily, these issues can all be solved before the November 1 vote (it is not too late for the damage to occur!):
- Proposals could all contain a “disclaimer”, stating that they are merely statements of intent and do not impact the manifesto/OPs
- The VC can approve provisional actions, like the institution of a PNC, on a case-to-case basis; if needed on the basis of an accepted proposal
- During later votes, changes to the OPs/Manifesto can be approved, in a way that complies with section 6 of the OPs
- OR: the November 1 vote can be delayed in order to have each proposal move through the necessary steps and respect the requirements laid down in section 6 of the OPs
These solutions still allow for timely actions to be taken (e.g. registering “provisional” political parties for the electoral wing) and at the same time respect the DiEM25 OPs that we all once agreed to.
We are looking forward to your timely reply.