Most Asked to One Hour for Europe
These two words suggest a centralisation, we want to avoid it. If a secretary or president is highly needed, the Bylaws allows in the ‘’ATTENTION’’ part the creation of new departments for a matter of organisation. Both of the 4 Coordinators can represent the Local Team outside the group. In this way, we can avoid abuses of powers and safeguard the principle of de-centralisation and shared responsibility. Two principles that enhance the use collective intelligence and negotiation skills. .
The Glocal Team exists only for a matter of organisation. To avoid the classic pyramid of ruling we limited Glocal Team’s power. During the Glocal Collegial Meeting it is impossible to do assembly with every Local Team of Europe, this is why we can use the elected Glocal Team to report the Local Teams’ positions in the Agenda. Furthermore, the Local Teams can get in touch with every Local or Glocal Team in Europe, as neurons works in a brain.
The Local Collegial Meeting is a meeting among different Local Teams.
If the Agenda is negotiated amongst different Teams the Chair is shared among the negotiating Glocal Teams, they share the responsibility to organise the next Glocal Collegial Meeting. How? The decision it’s up to them, they choose who does the report of the Glocal Collegial Meeting, who summons the GCL, who prepares the online voting procedure and so on. They have to cooperate.
You have to put forward a whole Agenda. This is why it is not compulsory.
The Reader’s Digest is a short list of ‘’essential’’ books that the members of One Hour for Europe should read to receive the benefit of education raising their own awareness.
Yes, with every educational institution lacking knowledge about the EU.
100 is the maximum of laymen allowed in the list, it is not compulsory to have all of them.
The precedent, or stare decises principle, is a legal device used in common law countries (that don’t have unique codes like civil law countries have e.g. Italy, Portugal) to be consistent with the judgement previously issued. In this way, the jurisprudence is built and the outcome of one case can be foreseen. For instance, let’s say that the External Relations Local Coordinator keeps in touch with a far right party and wants to engage a collaboration with them to support the idea that the EU shouldn’t provide protection for migrants exploited at work. (FACTS of the case) A Collaborator can ‘’sue’’ the ERLC to the Local Justice Department on the base of having a behaviour acting against the One Hour for Europe Bylaws, which respecs the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrants Workers and Members of their Families (1990), in the Preamble. Did the ERLC act against the Bylaws? (LEGAL QUESTION of the case) Let’s imagine that the 3 laymen rule that the ERLC was guilty and provide a penalty of an official warning and give a 2 weeks suspension to make the ERLC think about the wrong behaviour. (JUDGEMENT of the case) Precedent\stare decisis = If in future the same legal question arises, the new 3 laymen have to be consistent with the previous judgement. In other words, the laymen can’t judge the defendant (ERLC) as innocent. This is necessary because we cannot write a whole civil code, but we can collect cases and use them during the years
A layman is used to describe the use of ordinary, non-qualified people in the legal system. It is believed that by using ordinary people in courts it makes the system fairer and avoids people criticising the court for making decisions behind closed doors.