NBM in the Spain Zone scratch their heads over whether or not a member can resign from their position as an ‘Elder’… Added complication in this instance with the member doing a u-turn and attempting to reacquire his position.
Today brings to mind another historic step in our movement especially here in spain. My former head ,jew name bishop wrote a letter of resignation and forwarded same to all forums and other zonal officers,in the letter he said he was resigning his office as an elder of the Spanish zone ,which office was confirmed on him by korofo via section 47 of the constitution of the neoblack movement of Africa 2004 as amended, however in a turn of events, jew name bishop has once again resurfaced from the blues to reclaim that position as an elder in the same Spanish zone where he resigned .today the council of elders through the chairman,lord ibn yashim,jew name emma has refered to my office this seeming contentious matter and to determine the position of our constitution as to whether or not bishop can reclaim that position.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION.
(1) WHETHER OR NOT AN AXELORD HAVING BEEN CONFIRMED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF AN OFFICE CAN RESSIGN THAT OFFICE .
(2)WHETHER OR NOT HAVING RESIGNED THAT OFFICE HE CAN RETURN TO MAKE CLAIM TO THE OFFICE WHICH HE HAD RESIGNED EARLIER.
(3) WHETHER LORD IBN BATTUTA, JEW NAME BISHOP,HAVING RESIGNED HIS OFFICE AS AN ELDER CAN RETURN TO MAKE CLAIM TO THAT OFFICE FROM WHICH HE HAD EALIER RESIGNED.
THE CORRECT POSITION OF THE LAW AS ENVISAGED BY THE CONSTITUTION OF THE NEOBLACK MOVEMENT OF AFRICA 2004 AS AMENDED.
Although our constitution is completely silent on the questions of resignation yet the law is not all together silent on this particular issue, section 65 subsection 9 and 11 must be called to question and read together with the provisions of section 5(11),sect 27(3) and section 65 (1).
section 65 subsection 9 it quote in part that …
members shall carry out the movement ASSIGNMENT with DESPACTH… while subsection 11 of the same section 65 says that members shall always show good example.
The interpretation to be given to section 65 must be one that will foster the intention of the drafsmen,so what was the intention of the law when the draftesmen put this section together? Bishop was given an assignment by section 65 to become an elder by section 47,and was expected to carry out this assignment with despatch as contemplated by section 65,but what did he do with this assignment as an elder.he resigned from that assignement as an elder and abandoned the movement which in the opinion of the law is misconduct and a big furk up and by virtue of subsection 11 he failed to show any good example by that singular act of resignation,he didn’t resign because he was sick or incapable or because he had any deformity as contemplated by the constitution,he resigned because according to him ,it was being rumoured that he was the one causing trouble and division within the Spanish zone,I am of the view that jew name bishop had other alternative areas to douse such
rumours than resigning and leaving the movement in disarray especially when the movement needed him most.
WHAT IS THE WAY OUT OF THIS SO CALLED RESIGNATION IMPPASE
AYE AXEMEN,MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF ELDER,I greet you all in the name of korofo, there are two legal options open to the council of elders
OPTION 1 :
Since the constitution is silent on this so called resignation issue,the council of elders can revert to section 27(3) of the constitution which states as follows
That in the event that any member of the council of elders is found wanting in the discharge of his duties or of gross misconduct, he shall stand removed from office by TWO THIRDS MAJORITY of members PRESENT AND VOTING.
What this means is that the council of elders can come together and consider this so called resignation as misconduct and thereby remove bishop as an elder by a vote of two third majority of the elders that are present during this meeting where the issue is to be resolved, and that puts the issue to rest.
OPTION 2 :
the council can invoke its powers under section 5 (11) of the constitutuion which stipulates that ..THERE SHALL BE A ZONAL COUNCIL OF ELDERS WHICH SHALL BE THE HIGHEST LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL ORGAN OF THE ZONE.
What this means is that the council can constitute itself into tribunal or disciplinary body and reach a decision whether or not bishop,s resignation amounted to misconduct or not,in this way bishop will be summoned before the council to defend himself and after which the council shall reach a verdict on any disciplinary action to be taken against him which may also include removing him as an elder. the constitution says that the council is the highest decision making body
THAT JUSTICE MAY REIGN
Finally ,in order to forestall a repeat of this melee, the council should take immediate steps to enact a bye law dealing with resignation of officers of the movement with regards to the Spanish zone in so far as it is not at variance with section 1 of our constitution.
LORD SANTOS KABAKA
LEGAL OFFICER/ ELDER, SPANISH ZONE