Dear all,
CC is writing to clarify that ECM9 was adjourned this morning, more than 8 hours after its commencement.
According to V, Section III, Union Council By-laws, “at a time 6 hours after the commencement of the meeting, the proceedings on any business, agendum or motion under consideration shall be interrupted, and if the Union Council is in committee, the Union Council shall resume: provided that, if the Council Chairperson is of the opinion that the proceedings on which the Union Council is engaged could be concluded by a short deferment of the moment of interruption, he may in his discretion defer interrupting the business”. Upon the request of interruption by Councillors, considering the meeting could not be concluded by a short deferment, CC had to adjourn the meeting in accordance to Union Council By-laws.
Please note that no motions on agenda discussion could be entered and no resolutions on the agenda could be derived after the adjournment of meeting. Logically, CC, HS and all other Councillors shall not be considered as “absence”. No acting CC and HS could be elected.
Further, the Union Constitution provides that the Union Council Meeting shall be convened by CC and outside the Council Meeting only CC or HS (in my absence) can call the Meeting. It is therefore invalid for a 'so-called' unconstitutional fake 'CC' (EDSR) to act in my capacity. Therefore, the notice so-called issued by EDSR on ended ECM9 is invalid due to contravention to the Union Constitution.
Last but not least, notice of the Meetings shall be sent to all Councillors at least 24 hours beforehand. Clearly the 'resumption' (which is not constitutionally recognized by me) is another new Meeting session which requires prior sufficient notice.
Base on the facts as stated above, the so-called notice of the resumption of ECM9 at 7:30 pm tonight is invalid and unconstitutional. Moreover, the rights for actions against the unconstitutional acts done by some Councillors are preserved.
Regards,
CC”
沒有留言:
張貼留言