Go back
Are Russia and Belarus not Suspended from the ICCF?

Are Russia and Belarus not Suspended from the ICCF?

Only Chess

EintaluJ
PhD

Tallinn

Joined
08 Oct 21
Moves
2518
Clock
12 Jul 22

Russia and Belarus seem to have not been suspended from the international chess federation ICCF.

The ICCF Extraordinary Congress tried to suspend the Russian and Belarus federations.

Online voting was carried out from 27 April — 09 May 2022.

ICCF's homepage does not provide a clear result. I do not see it.
www.iccf.com/congresses
The link to that Congress disappeared recently.

The downloadable table of the voting results does not show in detail what country made what decision.

An excerpt from the results:

EC 2022-003 Suspend the Russian Federation — Void if EC 2022-001 is Defeated

For 33, Against 10, Abstain 14

I calculate that FOR: 58%.

EC 2022-01 — Amendment of ICCF Statute Article 17 — required 2/3 votes. The result was:

For 34, Against 10, Abstain 13

I calculate that FOR: 60%, which is less than the required 2/3 or 67%.

Thus, it seems that the ICCF failed to change its Statute to allow the suspension of Russia and Belarus based on majority voting.

Unfortunately, in my homeland Estonia, there is no information available on how our representative voted (if he voted) and based on what considerations.

The national federation has not officially responded to my question sent through the ICCF server. I also do not see any relevant news on the national federation's website.

Ragwort
Senecio Jacobaea

Yorkshire

Joined
04 Jul 09
Moves
189452
Clock
12 Jul 22
Vote Up
Vote Down

@EintaluJ

The English Correspondence Chess Federation report on the ICCF extraodinary meeting dated 12th May says that the Russian and Belorussian Federations were suspended and the circumstances under which games would continue including removal of opponent messaging if required. I don't know if that helps.

efcchess.org.uk

EintaluJ
PhD

Tallinn

Joined
08 Oct 21
Moves
2518
Clock
12 Jul 22

@Ragwort

Thanks, it is at least some information. However, it does not fit with the calculation of percentages I made, based on the table the ICCF provides.

Unfortunately, clarity is missing on the ICCF homepage.

Beowulf
Misfit King

Joined
30 Jun 22
Moves
1100
Clock
12 Jul 22
1 edit

Hopefully stopping kids and adults from playing chess will stop the war!

Brilliant plan 🙄

Can't wait to see if the world does the same to China soon.

(They won't)

EintaluJ
PhD

Tallinn

Joined
08 Oct 21
Moves
2518
Clock
12 Jul 22

@Beowulf

So far, they did not stop them from playing chess. But they cannot use their flag anymore. Anyway, Russian writers and chess players are regarded as enemies. And am afraid that the ICCF violated its own rules.

Ragwort
Senecio Jacobaea

Yorkshire

Joined
04 Jul 09
Moves
189452
Clock
13 Jul 22
Vote Up
Vote Down

@EintaluJ

I had a look at the table. I don't think the Abstentions counted so the 2/3 majority was achieved amongst those who voted. There is a sheet which gives the details of each delegate and the Estonian delegate was shown as abstained.

EintaluJ
PhD

Tallinn

Joined
08 Oct 21
Moves
2518
Clock
13 Jul 22

@EintaluJ

The ICCF Statutes webpage provides a new Statute, valid from 9th May 2022.

www.iccf.com/message?message=449

Article 17 contains a new sentence now:

"The Executive Board is empowered by Congress to propose suspension or dismissal of member federations for non-financial reasons."

Thus, the ICCF has also made a decision to suspend Russia and Belarus.

Thus, it seems that the ICCF Congress has calculated as follows:

34/(34 + 13) = 34/47 = 0.72 = 72%

It means that the "abstained" 13 voters have not been taken into account.

But who voted how, who remained neutral, who was missing, etc.?

Article 12 says the following:

"Amendments to the statutes require a vote of the general assembly, called the Congress, and a majority of two thirds of the members present or represented."

However, that Extraordinary Congress was online.

Finally, the downloadable table has other pages providing more detailed information. Thus, there is information that Estonian representative Jüri Kuusik did not "attend" the online congress.

The meanings of the terms "present", "represented", "attended", and "abstained" have remained unclear, which makes the manipulations possible.

Clarity is missing around that issue and on the ICCF homepage.

EintaluJ
PhD

Tallinn

Joined
08 Oct 21
Moves
2518
Clock
13 Jul 22

@ragwort said
@EintaluJ

I had a look at the table. I don't think the Abstentions counted so the 2/3 majority was achieved amongst those who voted. There is a sheet which gives the details of each delegate and the Estonian delegate was shown as abstained.
Yes. The only possibility to achieve 2/3 is not to account for those who "abstained".
There is a problem, however. It is possible to be PRESENT or REPRESENTED, but to ABSTAIN from voting on that issue, which means remaining NEUTRAL. And, as it was online voting, the question arises how did the ICCF decide that someone was or was not "present".

The majority of 2/3 was achieved among those who voted or among those who were "present"? And whether there was a possibility to vote for "neutral"?

The ICCF information is still mysterious.

EintaluJ
PhD

Tallinn

Joined
08 Oct 21
Moves
2518
Clock
13 Jul 22

@ragwort said
@EintaluJ

I had a look at the table. I don't think the Abstentions counted so the 2/3 majority was achieved amongst those who voted. There is a sheet which gives the details of each delegate and the Estonian delegate was shown as abstained.
The Estonian delegate is shown as "not attend". Did not log in or logged in, but did not vote or what?

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.