EGA — is defined as a closed event, because it implies secret vote
Accordingly the number of people present in the audience must be exactly reported in the record before the beginning of the meeting and the closing of the entrance. If anybody leaves the audience the number of people is to be recounted and to be written in the record for the elegibility of following vote.
It is evident from the record that EGA was an open session, that contradicts its sense and targets.
1) It is fixed in the record that at the beginning of the session there were 122 people, then under the first item 108 people voted, under the second 105 people, and under the third again 122 people (while there can not be different numbers at a closed session)
2) The ballots №1 and №2 for voting do not contain the paragraph “ABSTAINED”
Voting upon the Agenda (p.4) was channeled to the ballot boxes with the pink boxes №2 “Secret vote on early termination of authority”, instead of blue ballots №1 “Stating the Agenda” . As there is no pointing out the agenda in pink ballots, their accounting is invalid. However, the audit chamber fixed in the record the following results: 69-for, 44-against, 5 – abstained (but there is NO such paragraph in the ballots ) 69+44+5=118 (must be 122)
3) After that the President and the Board nominated the objection and left the audience with 37 participants. After 37 people left the record fixed 110 people instead of 85 (122-37=85)
4) And the under the fifth item 110 people voted instead of 85, who were these 25 people?
5) The items five and six caused the indignation, as one and the same question was under voting two times: at first as announced by secret vote, then by open vote, as the Moderator of the session was not pleased by the real results and he wanted by all means get the ones he needed.
The results of the voting given by the audit chamber:
For termination of authority -65
Against – 42;
Abstained – no
Spoilt ballots – 3.
65 people are not qualified 2/3 for taking such decision.
And then the blatant violation takes place: this question sis solved by the open vote. Is it possible to consider such decisions to be democratic and accord to the announced procedure? Let alone the fact that 37 people left the audience, and thus no how 110 people could take part in the voting
. It turns out that only 65 people decide the destiny of the organization under M.M. Reshetnikov’s pressure!
6) Under the seventh item “The election of ECPP President” already 88 people took part, though in the previous there were 110.
Further it makes no sense to list the violations in counting the votes, as it is evident for everyone that EGA can be qualified as an open session.
Some more procedure violations raise questions about the legitimacy of taken decisions under the items 12,13,14. They concern the exclusion of T.V. Mizinova from the ECPP Government and from ECPP membership (according to the record), and the proposal for arranging the online voting at future GA.
Two violations are on hand:
1) These questions were not in the list of proved EGA Agenda, so the session had to hold additional voting on including these issues. This was not done however.
2) The decision about exclusion of T.V. Mizinova from the ECPP Board and ECPP Membership are outside the competence (according to the record). Thus the decisions under the items 11,12,13 are canceled.
Numerous President’s and the Board Members’ protests on the fact of counting the votes and the carry-away sheet was not in the p. 7.2 of the Charter regulating the procedure of forming the Agenda were not reflected in the record.
The results of work of the audit chamber are doubtful. The moderator of the session could not settle the appropriate order for the closed session. The secretary reflected in the record nonexistent forms in the ballots.
So, it is absolutely unclear, how many people were there at EGA in fact? Thus, EGA, being arranged and held by the Organizational Committee and the initiative group passed with the gross violations of procedure moments and the Record of the closed session.
More complete list of the violations on the preparation for the EGA and the EGA itself was fixed at the Common Meeting of the National Department ECPP – Russia, held the same day on the 29th of June in the next audience, where 40 people including the President, the Board and the ECPP members, disagreed with the procedure of EGA, were present.
The extract from the record of EGA about the fixed violations:
«Speakers from the regions informed about the violations during the procedure of EGA and the procedure of the voting. The situation was qualified as “hostile takeover of power”. It was noticed that the acting President and the Board were refused to provide the dialogue, not a single fact of violation in work of the acting President and the Board was introduced.
During the procedure of holding the EGA, members of the ECPP and members of the Board named the following violations:
1) The agenda was formed by the so-called initiative group, but the register of this group had not been introduced. There is no such procedure in the ECPP Charter.
2) The members of the group received the agenda exactly on the day of holding EGA. This is the violation of the p.7.2 (7.2.1; 7.2.2) the ECPP Charter (the agenda is sent 30 days before, and formed by the Board)
3) The members of EGA got the ballots for voting which actually were the instruction for tendentious vote.
4) There was no paragraph “abstained” in the ballots.
5) In papers attached, that the members received during the voting, there were extracts from the ECPP Charter, without the p. 7.2., which runs that standard items of the agenda of GA are the President’s and the Committee reports , and it was offered by the Board in the agenda.
6) The Chairman of the meeting Reshetnikov M.M. intentionally mispresented the information on the item 7.2 (7.2.1 and 7.2.2) of the Charter, which regulates only the terms of convening the EGA, but not the Agenda, as Reshetnikov M.M. insisted.
P 7.3 of the ECPP Charter is convoked by the decision of the Board, or by the proposal not less than the fifth part of ECPP members, given in the written form within 60-days period. In all other cases see the p. 7.2.
7) Most members presented at the meeting were representatives from the RD SPB, who did not receive the official information from the ECPP Board in the process of preparing to the EGA, as the work of the site was blocked by Pavlotskaya M.S.
8) In the process of holding the EGA the microphones were being blocked during the attempts to speak made by the members of the Board.
9) During the voting the Moderator did not clearly name the item, which was the subject on voting, as a result people were confused and threw the ballots to the boxes not realizing what they voted on.
10) The doors of the hall during the EGA were opened, the number of people was changing constantly, and that is unacceptable for the closed session.
11)There were outsiders in the audience;
12) The decisions on the issues not included in the voted agenda of EGA were taken, which is the blatant violation. In particular, the exclusion of the acting President of ECPP-Russia T.V. Mizinova is out of the competence of this session.
13) Total amount of the people present in the audience was not counted, there was no sectional division which caused the disagreements in counting the votes by the audit chamber. The procedure of counting the votes was performed with violations, the audit chamber did not possess the common opinion regarding the number of votes.
14) There was the misrepresentation of the reasons for the convening the EGA. People who put their signatures for the holding of the EGA, based on the Memorandum between the President and the Pass-President, willing to clear out the situation in the establishment. Instead, at the EGA the Past President forced only one idea of early termination the authority of the President and the Board without reasoning.