Presentation on theme: "A Look At Some of the Principles behind Disciplinary Procedures within Roberts Rules of Order (11 th ed.)"— Presentation transcript:
A Look At Some of the Principles behind Disciplinary Procedures within Roberts Rules of Order (11 th ed.)
Roberts Chair Admonition Scolding Calling Member to Order Chair or member Puts question of penalty to members of the assembly. Naming the Offender Full Trials UCMJ Art. 15 Non-Judicial 1 Officer Summary Court Judge + >= 3 members General Court Judge + >= 5 members Severity of potential punishments increase with type.
2 Types: In Meeting and Outside Meeting “Conduct Unbecoming” Ch. XX, §61, p. 643, l. 6-11 General Principle: Any conduct “…tending to injure the good name of the organization, disturb its well-being, or hamper it in its work” is properly subject to disciplinary action whether or not it is stated in the bylaws. p. 644, l. 3-7
Chair or members can spotlight offense. Infraction witnessed by assembly – no investigation required. Offender given the opportunity to withdraw language or apologize for actions Calling Member to Order Chair gives warning, but if member has the floor, chair puts question “Shall the member be allowed to continue?” – Not debatable.
Amounts to preferring of charges. BEFORE taking action, chair directs secretary to capture offensive language/behavior used and place in minutes. Offender given opportunity to recant/retract. If done at time of offense – are the notes of language/action removed from minutes?
….the chair should take necessary measures to see that the order (or the assembly) is enforced, but should be guided by a judicious appraisal of the situation. p. 648, lines 30-32
Offenses occur outside the purview of the assembly. No ‘first-hand’ knowledge. Charges preferred and trial held before a disciplinary committee, or full assembly. Even if improper conduct DURING MEETING; for disciplinary action to take place OTHER THAN promptly after breech as previously described, charges MUST be preferred and a formal trial held.
Society has right to investigate, but no one has right to make information obtained public. Trials are ALWAYS held in Executive Session (private). Making facts public may constitute Libel. p. 655 [all], p. 656, lines 1-15
Trials can not legally establish guilt of accused as understood in a court of law. Hearsay evidence has to be admitted/allowed The accused DOES have the right of due process: Informed of charges, given time to prepare a defense, and appear (at trial) to defend themselves.
1. Confidential investigation by committee 2. Report of Committee – referral of charges 3. Formal notification of the accused 4. Trial 5. Assembly review of trial committee’s findings See page 656
“A judge is a law student who marks his own examination papers.” H. L. Mencken