2014 EBL Elections: Nominations Challenged

Leggi in italiano »

EBLThe Federations of Denmark, The Netherlands and Sweden have strongly challenged the nominations appointed by the new EBL Executive Committee last June.

The Election of the EBL President and the Executive Committee took place on June 29th, 2014 during the European Team Championships in Opatija (Croatia).

Ives Aubry from France (65 votes) won the electoral duel against Panos Gerontopoulos (46 votes) and was re-elected President.

The 12 elected member for the Executive Committee are (in alphabetical order):

Sevinç Atay (Turkey) 64 votes, Jurica Caric (Croatia) 53 votes, Marc De Pauw, (Belgium) 73 votes, David Harris (England) 49 votes, Josef Harsanyi (Germany) 70 votes, Jan Kamras (Sweden) 80 votes, Radoslaw Kielbasinski (Poland) 68 votes, Eric Laurant (Netherlands) 63 votes, Eitan Levy (Israel) 80 votes, Jafet Olafsson (Iceland)63 votes, Filippo Palma (Italy) 59 votes, Paul Porteous (Ireland) 54 votes.

Immediately after the election, the new Executive Committee held its first meeting to appoint:

1st Vice-President: Marc De Pauw

2nd Vice-President: Radek Kielbasinski

Treasurer: Josef Harsanyi

Secretary: David Harris

Presidential Committee: Sevinç Atay, Filippo Palma

WBF Delegates: Yves Aubry, Sevinç Atay, Marc De Pauw, Radek Kielbasinski, David Harris

 

Denmark, The Netherlands and Sweden have objected these nominations: They consider the ‘triangle’ of President,  Treasurer and Secretary at present not properly balanced and hence unacceptable in relation to the results of the election and membership contribution.

The Presidents of the respective countries wrote a letter of protest asking EBL to reconsider the nominations.

Henrik Friis, President of Bridge Federation of Denmark, wrote : “Specifically the lack of nomination of the two Executive Committee members with the strongest electoral mandate gained from 80 votes, Eitan Levy and Jan Kamras, either as member of the Presidential Council or as WBF delegate seems inappropriate in a democratic organization”.

Jons van der Mars, President of Dutch Bridge Federation, wrote: ” Good Governance requires that this result is reflected in a representative way in the nominations within the Executive Committee. However this is not what we see happening at his moment in time. Principles of Good Governance ask for countervailing powers instead of followers. Therefore we feel that the triangle: President, Treasurer and Secretary is at present not properly balanced. This is totally unacceptable for us. Therefore we do urge the President to reconsider the nominations, in concert with the entire committee, and to balance electoral strength and member contribution/participation in the nominations. Again: at this moment in time the Dutch Bridge Federations sees no such balance in the nominations. This has no benefit. To proceed with the current nominations will leave the European Bridge League exposed to inefficiency, arbitrary and whimsical decision making all of which will not help bridge at all.”.

Mats Qviberg, President of Swedish Bridge Federation, wrote: ” When reading the list of appointed Officers, Presidential Council (PC) members and WBF delegates as well as hearing reports on what transpired during your first constituting Executive Committee-meeting, we get extremely concerned. The candidate receiving the highest number of votes (tied with E. Levy) by the General Assembly was J. Kamras, the Honorary Secretary and a member of the PC in the previous administration. This notwithstanding Mr Kamras, on the proposal of the president, was stripped of both the aforementioned positions. No objective reason was apparently given for this. On the contrary, when queried the president admitted to having only personal reasons. The top vote-getter was thus replaced as Hon. Secretary by the person who only just made it into the EC in 12th and last place, and as a PC member by the person finishing 9th. While recognizing that the election results cannot just be cut-and-pasted onto the nominations within the Executive Committee, we cannot accept that they be totally ignored either. These actions, taken only a few hours after the General Assembly made its voice heard, are an insult to the electorate. In case the president considers the General Assembly having given him a strong mandate he should ponder the fact that he almost lost the presidency to a candidate who subsequently did not even make it into the top twelve!”.

The story and the full letters have been published on NewInBridge : click here»

***

 

(Visited 196 times, 1 visits today)
Previous Entries Elezioni EBL 2014: Nomine contestate Next Entries Elinescu-Wladow Affaire: The Outcome of the Appeal Court