Conference Agenda Oct 2021 PRINT - Flipbook - Page 19
remedy the omissions.
Proper consideration before expulsion
On the 24th April 2021 Adrian Spurrell, as co-chair of
GPRC, requested a ruling on the power of expulsion
of a member granted to GPRC by section 4(viii) of the
Constitution, and specifically what would be required for
‘proper consideration’.
SOC reply was as follows:
SOC notes Constitution section 4(viii): “[GPRC]
shall have the power to expel .. any person from
membership .. if in its opinion it is in the Party’s
interest to do so .. but no member may be expelled
without proper consideration”
The wording in the first part is clear, however the final part
qualifies it by a requirement for ‘proper consideration’.
Section 4(ix) of the constitution provides some guidance.
Sentence one reads: “As Green Party members we are
committed to attempting, wherever possible, to resolve
disagreement through mutual respect and discussion.”
This needs to be read with the next sentence which
indicates that expulsion is the concern of this section of
the constitution: “Expelling members of an organisation is
painful and should avoided wherever possible”.
Sentence three is not relevant, but the fourth and final
sentence again suggests that there should be some
interaction with the member: “Mediation must be
attempted on an informal basis before expulsion of a
member is considered”.
Here we have a requirement set for ‘mutual discussion’,
and for ‘mediation on an informal basis’ prior to expulsion.
Neither term sets out a clear requirement, but both imply a
requirement that some contact take place with the member
prior to expulsion, that might involve giving them a hearing.
SOC took the unusual step of contacting a long serving
former Chair of GPRC to ask how GPRC handled such
issues in the past. They said that they excluded two
members charged with serious criminal offences while
they were Chair, but only following their conviction. Up
until that point they were subject to suspension. They
also indicated that when contacted one of the members
resigned rather than risk harming the Party.
Can ‘retweeting’ count as campaigning,
harassment, bullying or bringing the party
into disrepute?
CL asked:
In relation to section 4 vii) of the GPEW constitution
and also the Code of Conduct: “Does retweeting
amount to campaigning ? Does stating fact equate to
harassment and bullying? Does retweeting tweets on
issues around women, issues in London, amount to
bringing the party to disrepute, despite the source of
the tweets?”
SOC reply was as follows:
s.4vii) states: “No member may campaign for any
candidate standing against a properly selected Green
Party candidate.”
An ordinary member of the public may campaign for any
candidate; under the constitution members of the Party
cannot campaign for candidates other than their own. What
is ‘campaigning for a candidate’?
The word ‘campaign’ is used in the constitution in relation
to a ‘Campaigns Committee’ but this is clearly placed in
command of ‘Extra-Electoral Campaigns’. This implies
that the Party divides campaigns between ‘Electoral
Campaigns’ and ‘Extra-Electoral Campaigns’.
s.4.vii) clearly refers to electoral campaigning, and in this
case for candidates who are standing against a properly
selected Green Party candidate. The electoral campaign
period is defined in law and the Electoral Commission
has a purpose test for political campaigning. Overall they
summarise this as asking questions as to ‘whether the
activity is reasonably regarded as intended to influence
voters in who they vote for’ and whether it explicitly
promotes political parties or candidates, or implicitly
promotes some candidates over others.
The purpose test covers whether an activity can
reasonably be regarded as intended to influence voters
to vote for political parties, for candidates that support
or do not support particular policies, or for categories of
candidates.
SOC are of the view that the requirement for ‘proper
consideration’ would, following Constitution s.4(ix), not be
fulfilled without some contact with the member.
Does a RT count as campaigning? This would be for DC
to decide. Twitter bans political ads so they cannot be
RTd. Purpose tests and intention would be a factor and
guidelines are given at https://www.electoralcommission.
org.uk/non-party-campaigners-where-start/purpose-testintention
GPRC should also consider whether suspension represents
sufficient protection for the Party until the completion of
the legal process, when in the case of conviction they can
also consider expulsion.
Bullying and Harassment are covered in Party policy
and examples are given there. Disrepute or bringing into
disrepute are mentioned in the constitution and Code of
Conduct without definition. The Code of Conduct says:
19