<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">A few comments for the consideration of the
appeals team. Although an id to send these comments directly to
the appeals commitee is provided, I much prefer to make this
comments publicly. <br>
<br>
1. I think Suresh should be reinstated immediately because the
conditions of his 'removal from the list' are not met.<br>
<br>
2. However, I will caution the appeals team against summarily
overturning a decision of a co-coordinator merely on technical
grounds without making any comments whatsoever on the substantive
issues involved. The problem is that there very often isnt a
strict meeting of all the required provisions for so many
activities of the IGC. For instance, even for the current Noncom
process for selection of MAG nominees, it is an indisputable fact
that all the laid down technical conditions for setting up the
nomcom were not met. Does it mean that if 4 people were to appeal
against the setting up of the nomcom, the decision to set up the
nomcom, and its subsequent outputs will be struck down?<br>
<br>
3. In the case of Suresh, technical conditions of 'removal from
the list' may not have been met. But a point for the appeals
committee to make a judgement on also is 'whether conditions of
suspension from the list are met or not'. Because, <i>in
practical terms</i>, if Suresh is to be reinstated within a
month, the action of co-coordinator has, till now, </font><font
face="Verdana">only </font><font face="Verdana">amounted to his
suspension from the list. It may not be right for the appeal
committee to take too narrow a construction of the fact that the
co-coordinator pronounced the decision of 'removal from the list',
and simply judge it as wrong, doing nothing more. The committee
needs to address, and judge, the context fully of the efforts of
the co-coodinator to impose the necessary minimum decorum and
orderliness on the elist in this particular case, and
corresponding the conduct of the member against whom the 'removal'
decision was given.<br>
<br>
4. Accordingly, if on substance, and not merely on technical
grounds, the disciplining efforts of the co-coordinator are found
appropriate, the merit of the intent of her decision may still be
salvaged by turning the 'removal' decision to 'suspension'
decision, whereby Suresh is immediately put back on the list.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 18 January 2013 04:55 AM, Ian
Peter wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:99B5B12AE95441728A797F79FC884BD5@Toshiba"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE:
12pt">
<p style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt"
class="MsoNormal"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">In
accordance with the IGC Charter, the Appeals team is now
requesting comments from the IGC membership as regards the
appeal against the removal from the IGC list of <span
style="BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BACKGROUND-ATTACHMENT:
scroll; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: repeat; FONT-FAMILY: ;
BACKGROUND-POSITION: 0% 0%; COLOR: ;
mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font:
minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: arial;
mso-bidi-font-weight: bold">Suresh Ramasubramanian</span>.
Comments should be sent to </font><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:appealsteam@lists.igcaucus.org"><font
style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">appealsteam@lists.igcaucus.org</font></a></p>
<p style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt"
class="MsoNormal"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">In doing so,
we announce that our interim finding is that Suresh’s
removal from the IGC list was not in accordance with the
IGC Charter. The Charter offers a specific set of
procedures which must be followed before such removal
takes place. In this case, the previous private and public
warnings given to Suresh needed to be followed by a one
month suspension, not removal from the list. As Suresh has
not previously served a one month suspension, we have no
option but to find the appeal is upheld. Therefore we
intend to recommend that, when we publish our final
findings, as soon as possible after the public comments
period ends 48 hours after this posting, Suresh should be
reinstated to the list.</font></p>
<p style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt"
class="MsoNormal"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">We do
suggest that, should you wish to comment, you first
acquaint yourself with the very specific provisions
outlined in the IGC charter, which can be found at <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.igcaucus.org/charter"><font
color="#0000ff">http://www.igcaucus.org/charter</font></a>.
It is those provisions, and whether they have been
followed or not, that must determine whether the appeal
should be upheld, not our personal opinions on the
decision made by our elected co-ordinator.</font></p>
<p style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt"
class="MsoNormal"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Please
comment within 48 hours. After the comments period has
ended, we will post our findings with appropriate
recommendations.</font></p>
<p style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt"
class="MsoNormal"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">The<span
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Appeals Team</font></p>
<p style="LINE-HEIGHT: 13pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 10pt"
class="MsoNormal"><font style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Shaila
Mistry, Ginger Paque, Roland Perry , Ian Peter and Deidre
Williams.</font></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>