E - Iccat

ICCAT REPORT 2012-2013 (I)
ANNEX 7
OTHER DECISIONS ADOPTED BY ICCAT IN 2012
7.1 MODIFICATION OF RULE 9 OF THE ICCAT RULES OF PROCEDURE IN RESPECT OF INTER-
SESSIONAL VOTING
Intersessional votes at ICCAT have become more common. Recent examples have shown that a high proportion
of Parties not responding in an intersessional vote may have a determining outcome on a decision. Under the
current Rules of Procedure, an omission to vote is recorded as an abstention and, as such, has the same effect as
a vote against a proposal. While modifying the quorum, the majority or how abstentions are counted in a vote
might require an amendment to ICCAT’s Convention, modifications could be made to Rule 9 (Voting) of
ICCAT’s Rules of Procedure to improve the intersessional voting process.
A) Objectives and outcomes of the proposal
The proposal to modify Rule 9 of the Rules of Procedure seeks to encourage greater participation in
intersessional votes by members of the Commission by providing additional steps throughout the process to
remind members of the need to respond to an intersessional vote and to provide members with extra time, in
exceptional circumstances, in order to submit their vote.
Under paragraph 14 of Rule 9 of the Rules of Procedure, members have 40 days to respond to an intersessional
vote, either with an affirmative vote, a negative vote, an indication of their abstention or a request for additional
time for voting, in which case a further 30 days shall be allowed from the expiration of the initial 40-day period.
In the event of an extension, the Executive Secretary has to inform all members of the final date by which
responses must be received. Aside from this information, the Executive Secretary is not required to communicate
with the members during the 40 or 70-day voting period.
To encourage members to respect the need to respond to an intersessional vote, it is proposed that Rule 9 be
modified to require additional communications by the Executive Secretary to the members at various stages of
the process:
− In paragraph 13 of Rule 9, if no request for an intersessional vote on the chairman’s determination has been
received after 10 days, the Executive Secretary informs the members and reminds them of the number of
days left to respond to the initial proposal.
− 10 days before the end of the initial voting period, if no request for an extension of time has been received,
the Executive Secretary informs the members of the approaching expiration of the 40-day period, reminds
them of the need to respond and could identify the members whose responses have not yet been received.
− In paragraph 14 of Rule 9, the Executive Secretary when informing the members of the final date by which
responses must be received after an extension could identify the members whose responses have not yet been
received.
In order to contribute to achieving quorum for intersessional votes, a new paragraph 14bis is proposed which
gives the Chair the ability, in exceptional circumstances, to extend the voting period for an additional 30 day
period.
B) Possible drafting suggestions
13. Within 10 days of the initial transmittal of a proposal pursuant to paragraph 11 (a), in accordance with Rule
7(d), any member may request an intersessional vote on the chairman’s determination of the necessity of
considering the proposal intersessionally made under paragraph 9, to be subject to the majority decision
rule contained in paragraph 2. If no such request is received, the Executive Secretary shall inform all
members and indicate the number of days remaining to respond to the proposal.
14. Members shall respond within 40 days of the date of the initial transmittal of a proposal or request,
indicating whether they cast an affirmative vote, cast a negative vote, abstain from voting, or require
216