- Skriv ut
- Uppdaterad 19 Sep 2013
Resolution from AI-Sweden Underlag till styrelsemöte 1-2 december 2002
Till: Styrelsen
Från: Sekretariatet
Datum: 30 november 2002
AI Sweden – The Cycle of the International Council
Note: Changes are in
bold.
Deleted text appears
in italics
The International Council:
1. DECIDES
to amend Article 14:
The International Council shall consist of the members of the International Executive Committee and of representatives of sections and shall meet at intervals of not more than
three
[deleted: “two”]
years on a date fixed by the International Executive Committee. Only representatives of sections shall have the right to vote at the International Council.
2. DECIDES
to amend Article 28:
Members of the International Executive Committee, other than the member of staff elected under Article 26(b),
a.)
shall hold office for a period of
three
[deleted: “two”]
years and
b.)
shall be eligible for re-election for a maximum tenure of
two
[deleted: “three”]
consecutive terms.
Explanatory note
:
There are several reasons to move to a three-year International Council cycle.
The International Councils are extremely expensive. The cost for the International Council is about £750,000. The cost savings from the one ICM that would no longer be held every six years could free funding for at least ten other global meetings within the movement with a more varied participation than the delegates to an International Council.
Furthermore, the movement agreed to establish the Chairs Forum at the 2001 International Council. In earlier discussions, some sections expressed their fears that the proposed three-year cycle would reduce membership involvement in international decision-making. To address these legitimate concerns the Chairs Forum will allow sections to give their input during the years between the International Council.
In addition, the time between International Councils for undertaking studies, reviews etc. is today, in practice, very limited. When including the appropriate time for translations, proper movement-wide consultations and proper internal section/structure consultations many studies/reviews are stressed, which could affect the quality of the consultation and the study/review itself. Often studies are not finalised within the cycle between two International Councils, which could most probably be avoided with a three-year cycle.
Finally, when AI now moves into a six-year Integrated Strategic Plan cycle, it makes sense to let the plan work for three years (instead of two) before meeting at the International Council to view the outcome. We need to give ourselves more time to plan, act and evaluate our activities.
The proposed changed cycle should take place in time for the next International Council, which would then be held 2006. This means the new cycle supports the Integrated Strategic Plan (ISP) cycle as well, since the 2009 International Council would decide upon the next ISP.
The proposed changes affect Article 28 with the change of a two to a three year period of holding office within the International Executive Committee but we do not find that Article 15 has to be changed in relation to the assessment.
AI Sweden