Click here to read all amendments.
Proposal 1: Amendment to Article 1-section 1
"With this, the international non-profit organisation will be founded.
It shall be called the International Humanist and Ethical Youth Organisation.
The organisation shall be known by the acronym "IHEYO". The official
language of IHEYO is English. The organisation comes under the provision and
regulations of the title III from the Belgian law of June 1921 concerning
the non-profit organisations and the foundations (article 46 to 57)".
Reason for the proposal: IHEYO needs this to be formally registered as an
international non-governmental organisation in the Belgian register. The IHEYO
EC proposed the amendment.
-Because of the reason given, members accepted the proposal.
Proposal 2: Amendment to Article 1-section 2
"The official seat of IHEYO is at …..(address of our acquired
office), Belgium. The seat can be transferred to any other place in Belgium
by the decision of the General Assembly, to be published in the Belgian Governmental
Gazette and communicated with the Federal department of Justice".
Reason for the proposal: IHEYO needs this to be formally registered as an
international non-governmental organisation in the Belgian register. The IHEYO
EC proposed the amendment.
Mari-Mathe Apenes asked for clarification as to whether an office accommodation
has been secured in Belgium for the purpose of this section. Lars-Petter Helgestad
replied on behalf of the EC that IHEYO has been given an office accommodation
in Belgium. Frederik Dezutter further furnished the GA with the address of
the newly acquired office, which is situated at Kantienberg in Gent, Belgium.
-With these clarifications, the proposal was adopted.
Proposal 3: Amendment to Article3- Section 1
The EC proposed that "The organisation is accessible for foreigners
and Belgians" be added in front of the article so as to further comply
with the Belgian regulation for the sake of satisfying registration rules.
-The proposal was accepted unanimously.
Proposal 4: Amendment to Article 3-Section3- 1st Paragraph.
Osma Suominen and Alina Mantttari proposed that "…and be democratically
governed. Full members…" be changed to "…and be
democratically governed. However, in special cases, such as countries where
Human Rights are not well established, the General Assembly may also grant
full membership to local humanist groups that are democratically governed
but not formally constituted. Full members…".
Reason: it was noted that the formal requirements for member organisations
were in some cases too strict. This amendment attempts to loosen up some of
the requirements without making them too broad.
-The proposal was accepted.
Proposal 5: Article 3-section 7- 1st Paragraph
Lars-Petter Helgestad proposed that "… acting on a proposal from
the Board,…" in this article be changed to "… acting
on a proposal from the Executive Committee,…" for clarification.
-The proposal was adopted.
Proposal 6: Article 3 - Section 7 - 2nd paragraph
This paragraph which states that "…in clear violation of IHEYO's
purpose as stated in the bylaws. …" was proposed for adjustment
and re-construction by the trio of Alina Mantttari, Osma Suominen and Lars-Petter
Helgestad. They proposed that because there are currently no sanctions for
unpaid membership fees or violations of the bylaws (other than the purpose),
the paragraph should be changed to "… in clear violation of IHEYO's
purpose as stated in the bylaws, acting in clear violation of the bylaws themselves,
or leaving membership fees unpaid for at least three consecutive years.…"
.
-The proposal was adopted.
Proposal 7: Article 4 - Section 2 - 3rd Paragraph
To avoid repetition in bylaw articles, Lars-Petter Helgestad proposed that
this paragraph be chaged to "To amend the bylaws, as specified in
Article 8; …" since "To amend the bylaws, requires a two
thirds (2/3) majority as specified in Article 8;" seems tautologous.
-The Proposal was accepted as valid.
Proposal 8: Article 4 - Section 2 - 3rd Paragraph
For same reason as above, Lars-Petter Helgestad also proposed the amendment
of this paragraph to "To dissolve IHEYO, as specified in Article 11."
-This was also considered valid for ratification and was duly adopted
by members present without further deliberations.
Proposal 9 & 10: Article 4 - Section 3 & 4
-Proposals 9 & 10 were rejected by the General Assembly
after deliberations. The EC was given the task of working on the proposals
and see if it is worthy to be presented at the next General Assembly in Paris.
Proposal 11: Article 4 - Section 5 - 1st Paragraph
Because of what looks like a logical error in the paragraph, the duo of Osma
Suominen and Alina Manttari proposed that "… any question that
one-fourth (1/4) of the General Assembly has requested be discussed.…"
be changed to "… any question one-fourth (1/4) of the full members
has requested to be discussed.…".
Mari-Marthe Apenes of HEF* proposed that the phrase in question be changed
to "… any question one of the full members has requested to be
discussed...".
-The first proposed amendment was adopted because the thought
of the second proposed amendment was different from first proposed amendment.
Proposal 12: Article 4 - Section 5 - 1st Paragraph
Osma Suominen and Alina Manttari proposed the complete removal of this particular
phrase "to aid in submission of absentee votes." The reason was
that the concept of absentee votes was removed from the bylaws in Berlin.
-The removal was approved.
Proposals 13: Article 5 - Section 1
Lars-Petter suggested that "(…) and not more than twelve (12)
persons (…)" be changed to "(…) and not more than
ten (10) persons (…)" because the EC did not conclude the deliberations
on it during their last meeting in Oslo and that he felt the GA should just
decide on it once and for all.
-Deliberations on the proposal resulted in a postponement motion
which was adopted by the entire GA. The proposal was therefore postponed till
the next GA when in-depth deliberations shall be carried on the proposal.
Proposal 14: Article 5 - Section 2
-Amendment to this section as proposed by Wolfgang Huber suffered the same
fate as proposal 13 because the some members of the GA strongly opined (after
deliberations as to whether non-office holding member of the EC cannot just
assist the Treasurer in his duties) that the proposal should be re-presented
at the next General Assembly.
Proposal 15 & 16: Article 5 - Section 3 - 1st Paragraph and Article
5 - Section 11
-These proposals were postponed to the next General Assembly
based on the fact that a compromise could not be reached by members present.
Proposal 17: Article 6 - Section 1
This section which reads, "IHEYO is a section of IHEU" was
asked to be removed from the bylaws by Osma Suominen and Alina Manttari because
it has been recognized that IHEYO does not qualify as a section of the IHEU
because it is international, and IHEU is unwilling to change its definition.
A widely held opinion is that sister organizations do not need to grant each
other any formal status. The current articles that mention IHEU (Article 6,
Section 2 and Article 4, Section 4) should be a good enough definition of
the relation and cooperation between IHEU and IHEYO.
-This proposal was accepted for removal from the IHEYO bylaw.
Proposal 18: Article 7 - New Section
The IHEYO EC proposed this new section to cater for the "Membership fee"
of members. The proposal reads:
"For member organization with less than 1,000 members: 50 Euros.
For member organization with more than 1,000 members: 75 Euros.
For member organization with more than 3,000 members: 100 Euros.
If any organization/member cannot pay the stipulated fees then the organization
concerned has to formally state why they could not and the EC would then decide
on this."
Christoffer Larsen of *HEF noted that the kicking out of the members should
be clarified by the EC in the bylaw in case of defaulting members. He wants
this to be explicitly stated. Antje Leuschke of *JUHUS suggested that it should
be stated clearly that the membership fees is annual. Sonja Eggerickx, IHEU-IHEYO
liaison, opiniated that all that is needed in the bylaw is the minimum membership
fee. Generally there were disagreement as to whether the amount must be expressly
stated in the bylaw rather than in a Standing Order.
Mari-Marthe Apenes of *HEF made another proposal to replace that of the EC
with due consideration of the points raised by members.
"The membership depends on the number in the member organisation;
large member organisations
pay more than the small organisations. The minimum fee is 1Euro per year.
If any member cannot pay the stipulated fees, then the members concerned has
to formally state why they cannot to the EC. The EC will then decide if they
(the affected organisation) can remain a full member with voting rights".
-With the effected additions, the second proposal by Mari-Marthe was
adopted while the membership fees as proposed by the EC was also adopted
(but not accepted for inclusion in the bylaw) as the prescribe fee for the
year 2004/2005.
Proposal 19 & 20: Article 8 - Section 1
-The two proposals proposed by the EC for the purpose of registration in Belgium
were also given unanimous approval by the General Assembly.
Proposal 21: New Article 9 (Replacing the whole old Article
9)
In line with the responsibility given the EC by the GA in Berlin, the EC proposed
an entirely new section to replace the old article 9.
Mari-Mathe Apenes of *HEF proposed that "August 31" in article
3 be changed to "December 31".
-After some deliberations, the proposal was adopted General Assembly
with the effected amendment by Mari-Marthe Apences.
Proposal 22: Article 10 - New Section
For the sake of growth, Osma Suominen and Alina Manttari proposed an entirely
new section: "Standing committees and working groups" which
reads: "The Executive Committee may appoint and dissolve standing
committees or temporary working groups as needed." The reason advanced
was basically because the need to create working groups and standing committees
has been noted but not yet defined in the bylaws.
-The GA adopted this proposal unanimously.
Proposal 23: Article 11 - Section 1
Still for the sake of registration, the EC proposed the change of "Proposal
of dissolution …" in their section to "Unabated the
application of the articles 50§3,55 en 56of the law concerning the NGO's
the INGO's and the foundations, proposal of dissolution (…)".
-The proposal was accepted and adopted by the GA.
Proposal 24: Extra proposal for the Kampala GA
Based on the fact the supporting proposal (Proposal 15) has been suspended,
the proposers- Osma Suominen and Alina Manttari- withdrew the proposal.
-The GA. accepted the withdrawal.