Officer Steps down

[Guest guest_richard]

In conducting a meeting an officer (General Council Interpreter) steps down from his position from time to time so he can give his opinion. We were told in one meeting that once this officer steps down, he should remain down for the entirety of the meeting.

I haven't been able to find this rule in writing but I have believed it because it was told us by an elder, can someone clarify this for me please?

Thank you,

Richard

[hmtcastle]

I haven't been able to find this rule in writing but I have believed it because it was told us by an elder . . .

Elders can be wrong.

He need only step down until the pending question is disposed of.

But this stepping down should be a rare occurrence. If he does this frequently, perhaps he should find a different position. Speaking of which, just what is his position? In other words, what is it about being the General Council Interpreter that makes him think he should (and even can) step down?

[Josh Martin]

In conducting a meeting an officer (General Council Interpreter) steps down from his position from time to time so he can give his opinion. We were told in one meeting that once this officer steps down, he should remain down for the entirety of the meeting.

I haven't been able to find this rule in writing but I have believed it because it was told us by an elder, can someone clarify this for me please?

There are only two officers in RONR which are expected to refrain from expressing their opinions: the chair (in assemblies larger than about a dozen) and the Parliamentarian (in all assemblies). If the chair of a large assembly steps down to express his opinion (which should be rare) he may return to the chair when the pending main question is disposed of. The Parliamentarian cannot temporarily step down from his position. If he finds himself unable to maintain the appearance of impartiality required for the position, he should resign. All other officers are free to express their opinions and don't need to step down from anything. I have no idea what a "General Council Interpreter" is, so I don't know which rules apply to him.

If your organization has its own customized rules which require the General Council Interpreter to step down from his position to give his opinion, it's up to your assembly to interpret those rules.

[David A Foulkes]

It would seem that the General Council Interpreter is one of (perhaps typically four) tribal officers, including the GC Chairman, GC Vice-Chairman and GC Secretary. Not sure why he would need to step down to enter debate, so perhaps your bylaws hold the answer to that question as well as your original one.

As noted by Mr. Martin, in the sorts of deliberative assemblies RONR offers guidance to, the only officers who should normally not enter into debate are the presiding officer (often the President) and the Parliamentarian. So, perhaps the GCI is, in effect, the tribal parliamentarian? (doing all that interpreting??)

[Josh Martin]

It would seem that the General Council Interpreter is one of (perhaps typically four) tribal officers, including the GC Chairman, GC Vice-Chairman and GC Secretary. Not sure why he would need to step down to enter debate, so perhaps your bylaws hold the answer to that question as well as your original one.

As noted by Mr. Martin, in the sorts of deliberative assemblies RONR offers guidance to, the only officers who should normally not enter into debate are the presiding officer (often the President) and the Parliamentarian. So, perhaps the GCI is, in effect, the tribal parliamentarian? (doing all that interpreting??)

If your suspicions are correct, my follow-up searches suggest that the role of the GCI is the interpreting of language, not of rules. Thus, if any "stepping down" is required, it would be required by the rules of the tribe, and that would be the place to look to answer this question. This also suggests that it would likely be impractical for the GCI to "step down" for the duration of the meeting.

[hmtcastle]

Not sure why he would need to step down to enter debate . . .

Perhaps because he shouldn't be interpreting his own remarks (a la

).

[David A Foulkes]

If your suspicions are correct, my follow-up searches suggest that the role of the GCI is the interpreting of language, not of rules. Thus, if any "stepping down" is required, it would be required by the rules of the tribe, and that would be the place to look to answer this question.

Yes, as I suggested.

This also suggests that it would likely be impractical for the GCI to "step down" for the duration of the meeting.

Guess I should have added my own at the end of my post. I try not to overdo it, in deference to Mr. H. William YouTube.