Sloan Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:49 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 at 09:49 PM Good afternoon,Recently, a member of a small Commission (6 people) that I serve as staff for asked the following:Is there a difference between an abstention and a recusal (which, based on what I've read so far is to not vote because of a conflict of interest)?I was not sure of the answer. As I explained, I equated an abstention with a simple non-vote (covering a number of circumstances), while a recusal was a conflict of interest. However, it seems as if a member's recusal is not specified in Robert's Rules - only a non-vote in conflict of interest circumstances.If a member had a conflict of interest and did not vote, would abstention be a suitable description? Or, should their "non-vote" be described differently.Thank you,Meghan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted February 24, 2012 at 10:57 PM Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 at 10:57 PM From a parliamentary standpoint, whatever you call it, it has the same effect. The reason a person abstains does not change the fact that he is abstaining. According to RONR, no member can be compelled to refrain from voting, so it is ultimately the decision of the member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trina Posted February 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 at 11:16 AM ...If a member had a conflict of interest and did not vote, would abstention be a suitable description? Or, should their "non-vote" be described differently.Thank you,MeghanWhy is a precise description of the "non-vote" needed? Does the group have a requirement that non-votes (for whatever reason) be recorded? That would not be the case under the rules in RONR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.