I'm looking at an issue with a Special Rule of Order to outline a disciplinary process which omits much of the protections and rights granted to the accused, no right of the accused to have any access or visibility into the evidence or testimony, no trial is required... it's a mess. I'll probably have more questions, but first, the bylaws don't use the recommended language for the parliamentary authority (don't specify the special rules of order supercede RONR) and don't seem to be vague. Can the special rule of order neuter the rights of the accused by stating that RONR is optional given the bylaws language?
Per the Bylaws: Robert's Rules.
In all matters not covered expressly by these Bylaws, Robert’s Rules of Order, newly revised, shall prevail.
Per the Special Rule of Order: Robert’s Rules
In matters not expressly addressed in these Rules, Robert’s Rules may be consulted for guidance but need not be followed if, in the opinion of the Executive Committee, it would be more appropriate in the specific circumstances to follow an alternative course.
