Proposal to Amend the Statutes of the European Pirate Party (PPEU)
Current Text of Article 17, Paragraph 3:
"(3) All nominations shall be done at least a month prior to the meeting at which the election takes place."
Proposed Text of Article 17, Paragraph 3:
"(3) All nominations shall be submitted before the start of the Council meeting at which the election takes place."
Dear Council Members,
While the intention behind this proposal is clearly aimed at resolving our current difficulties with missing pre-nominations, changing the statutory text to allow regular candidacies right up until the start of the meeting is highly problematic and, frankly, completely unnecessary.
Undermining a Deliberate Democratic Consensus: The original one-month deadline was not a random administrative figure; it was a very deliberate, hard-won consensus established by all member parties when our Statutes were drafted. It was unanimously agreed upon to ensure that all national delegations have sufficient time to consult internally, debate the merits of applicants, and build a proper democratic mandate. This consensus is a cornerstone of our mutual respect and internal democracy.
Eroding Accountability and Quality: This one-month window forces potential candidates to reflect deeply on the serious responsibility of a Board position before stepping forward. It ensures high-quality, committed, and transparent leadership rather than rushed, impulsive appointments.
The Current Framework Already Resolves Vacancies: We must clarify a vital structural point: Our current legal framework already covers the scenario of unfilled seats. Even if no one applies within the one-month statutory deadline, the Council is not blocked. According to our established Rules of Procedure (Rule 3, Paragraph 4), the floor is automatically opened for spontaneous candidates during the meeting if there are fewer candidates than open seats.
No Statutory Change Needed: Because this emergency mechanism for vacancies is already safely regulated below the statutory level, we do not need to alter the Statutes at all. Amending Article 17(3) to fix a temporary lack of candidates is a dangerous over-correction that permanently destroys our core democratic notice periods for regular elections.
Legal Vulnerability under Luxembourgish Law: Luxembourgish association law (ASBL) places a heavy emphasis on the principle of transparency. Members must be informed in advance of key personnel decisions. Standardising last-minute “surprise” candidacies entirely without prior notice makes regular elections legally vulnerable to post-meeting challenges.
The current rule is wise, protective, and built on consensus. The vacancy problem is already solved by the Rules of Procedure. Therefore, to protect our internal democracy and legal certainty, this proposed amendment should be rejected entirely, and we should maintain the current, unamended text of Article 17(3).