[pp.int.general] [pp-leaders] PPI Court of Arbitration ruling n. 2012-1A

Wed Jan 18 01:36:32 CET 2012

Before I accuse any person, I would like to see the documents. I have so
far only accused the COA in general. Once the prosecutor who conducted the
research has been found, we can find out the reasons behind this flawed
investigation. As Andrew Norton pointed out, there has been widespread
protest against holding it in Europe. At the GA in 2011 (Friedrichshaven,
if I remember correctly), there was a promise made to host it outside
Europe. This alone should have made it so, possibly together with the
widespread protests, that point 1 of Samir's accusations are correct and
approved. About the corruption accusations, I can't judge this personally,
since I am not really involved in PPI. So I won't make a verdict, or even
form an opinion on that before seeïng direct proof or experiencing it
first-hand.

-- Roberto Moretti

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Jerry Weyer <jerry.weyer at piratepartei.lu>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> As (kind of) an involved person I don't want to comment on other things,
> but this...
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Brendan Molloy <
> brendan.molloy at pirateparty.org.au> wrote:
>
>> I must know, why does everything have to be prefixed with "considering"?
>> It hurts my eyes.
>>
>
> It's because (I guess) the COA is influenced by the French way of writing
> judgments. Believe it or not, civil lawyers (especially French) write like
> this... so you have court ruling at the highest level expressing themselves
> with "considérant que" (considering that).
>
> It's somewhat weird for common law students/lawyers but I wouldn't call it
> irresponsible or unusual from a European perspective (the European Court of
> Justice does the same).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jerry
>
>
>>
>> Marco Confalonieri wrote:
>> > **** Summary ****
>> >
>> > Co-chairman Samir Allioui asked the PPI Court of Arbitration to
>> > investigate on the process that led the PPI Board to choose Prague as
>> > location for the next General Assembly of PPI.
>> > The claim of S. Allioui focused on two arguments :
>> >
>> > – The board of PPI, both in the previous and actual composition, had an
>> > engagement to select a location outside Europe.
>> >
>> > – The location was chosen because of corruption/personal advantage of
>> > members of the board and not in the interest of Pirate Parties
>> > International.
>> >
>> > For the first argument, the Court of Arbitration reminds that no
>> > evidence or testimony has been found to support the claim that the PPI
>> > board had an engagement to host the next General Assembly outside of
>> Europe.
>> >
>> > However, the Court of Arbitration ruled that, even if such engagement
>> > did exist and was proven, none of the proposals that were made to the
>> > Board in both the previous and actual composition would have met the
>> > actual requirements of such engagement, and therefore discarded this
>> > argument.
>> >
>> > The call for public cooperation, to find evidence for the second
>> > argument of corruption, made by the Court of Arbitration in its n°2012-1
>> > preliminary ruling gave no response.
>> >
>> > The Court of Arbitration therefore discharged the previous and actual
>> > boards of corruption claims.
>> >
>> >
>> > **** Court of Arbitration ruling n°2012-1-A, 2012 January the 17th ****
>> >
>> > -> PPI Co-chairman Samir Allioui filling charges of corruption against
>> > the rest of the PPI board regarding the choice of next GA location.
>> >
>> > THE PIRATE PARTY INTERNATIONAL COURT OF ARBITRATION,
>> >
>> > Given the PPI Statutes,
>> >
>> > Given the December 20th of 2011 "Filing charges against the board of PPI
>> > regarding the next GA Location" statement by the PPI co-chairman Samir
>> > Allioui,
>> >
>> > Given the various debates that followed on PPI restrict "PP leaders",
>> > "PP leaders discussions", and public "general" mailing-lists,
>> >
>> > Given the audio recordings and text minutes from the 2011-12-20 PPI
>> > board meeting,
>> >
>> > Given the minutes from 2010 December PPI board meetings,
>> >
>> > Given the January 3th preliminary ruling n°2012-1 by the Court of
>> > Arbitration,
>> >
>> > - ABOUT THE ENGAGEMENT OF HAVING A PPI GA OUTSIDE OF EUROPE
>> >
>> > 1) Considering Samir Allioui affirmed in a December 21th mail that an
>> > oral agreement had been made in Brussels PPI General Assembly, promising
>> > that the 2011 PPI GA would take place outside of Europe.
>> >
>> > 2) Considering Samir Allioui stated that testimonies could be provided.
>> >
>> > 3) Considering Samir Allioui did not provide such testimonies to the
>> > Court of Arbitration.
>> >
>> > 4) Considering that, whatever the engagements taken or not in Brussels
>> > GA, the PPI board could not select a PPI GA location outside of Europe
>> > if no serious offer was made meeting this requirement.
>> >
>> > 5) Considering that, according to the PPI board minutes, only two offers
>> > were made to the 2010-2011 PPI board, both in Germany.
>> >
>> > 6) Considering that, regardless of the scope of the possible engagements
>> > that could have been taken in Brussels, the main motivation for hosting
>> > the PPI General Assembly outside of Europe would have been to allow PPI
>> > Members from other continents to send delegates more easily.
>> >
>> > 7) Considering that none of the three offers to host the PPI General
>> > Assembly that were made to the 2011-2012 PPI board could have fulfilled
>> > this condition, as they were all located either inside, or too close to
>> > Europe.
>> >
>> > 8) Considering that the official offer to host the PPI General Assembly
>> > in Tunisia by the self-proclaimed Pirate Party of Tunisia has been sent
>> > after the deadline.
>> >
>> > 9) Considering that the Pirate Party of Tunisia has acknowledged to the
>> > Court of Arbitration that fact, stated that they did not have any
>> > evidence of corruption of the PPI board, and did not reply to the
>> > subsequent Court of Arbitration inquiries.
>> >
>> > 10) Considering that therefore, the engagements to host the next PPI
>> > General Assembly outside of Europe that Samir Allioui is referring to,
>> > which remain to be proven, would neither justify invalidating the
>> > choices of the PPI General Assembly locations by the 2010-2011 and the
>> > 2011-2012 PPI Boards, nor constitute a corruption evidence.
>> >
>> > - ABOUT THE CORRUPTION DURING THE PPI BOARD MEETING
>> >
>> > 11) Considering Samir Allioui affirmed in his December 20th statement
>> > that there was corruption in the PPI board choice of PP-CZ location for
>> > 2012 PPI General Assembly over proposition from PP-RU and PP-TN, and
>> > that evidence of it could be found easily.
>> >
>> > 12) Considering that the Court of Arbitration did not find any proof of
>> > corruption in a first look into the mail exchanges, the minutes from
>> > previous PPI board meetings, or the pad and audio recording from
>> > 2011-12-20 PPI board meetings.
>> >
>> > 13) Considering that Samir Allioui has been asked to point out to the
>> > Court of Arbitration clear and explicit evidence of his corruption
>> claim.
>> >
>> > 14) Considering that Samir Allioui has not given a more precise
>> > indication in the delay given by the Court of Arbitration.
>> >
>> > 15) Considering that the charges of corruption of the board by a PPI
>> > co-chairman are an extremely serious claim, and that all the chances had
>> > to be given to characterize the claim before dismissing the corruption
>> > charges toward the PPI board.
>> >
>> > 16) Considering that a public call for evidence of corruption allowing
>> > privacy and anonymity has been made by the Court of Arbitration in its
>> > preliminary ruling n°2012-1.
>> >
>> > 17) Considering that nobody answered to the public call for evidence of
>> > corruption.
>> >
>> > 18) Considering that, therefore, there are no elements to support the
>> > claim of corruption of the PPI board.
>> >
>> >
>> > S T A T E S
>> >
>> > Article 1) There was not corruption in the choices of the 2011 and 2012
>> > PPI General Assembly locations.
>> >
>> > Article 2) The current ruling will be published on the PPI website.
>> >
>> > Deliberated by the Pirate Party International Court of Arbitration on
>> > January 10th of 2012, attended by the followings :
>> >
>> > Sven Clement,
>> > Marco Confalonieri,
>> > Arturo Martinez,
>> > Maxime Rouquet
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Brendan Molloy
>> Secretary
>> Pirate Party Australia
>>
>> M: +61 449 617 246
>> W: http://www.pirateparty.org.au
>> E: brendan.molloy at pirateparty.org.au
>> T: @piecritic
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pp-leaders mailing list
>> pp-leaders at lists.pp-international.net
>> http://lists.pp-international.net/listinfo/pp-leaders
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Piratepartei Lëtzebuerg
> 1, Sonnestrooss
> 5683 Dalheim
> Luxembourg
>
> http://www.piratepartei.lu
> jerry.weyer at piratepartei.lu
> +352 661 86 04 01
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>

-- 
Roberto Moretti

PPNL Member & Indie Games Developer.
@robskemoretti
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20120118/fd8388d6/attachment.html>