Review of Peter's selection criteria, definitions and some left over matters.

Ref: Here.

Fide active list. Here.

Before we review the selection criteria, lets look at some definitions. When we say MCF, we are talking of the collective body of the main committee and it's rulings. So individual committee members is not MCF. Even the chair of sub committees is not MCF unless they have been given explicit authority from the main committee to make certain decisions without review. And that is unlikely unless the main committee is sleeping on the job. So any decision that is not ratified by the main committee is only a personal opinion even if they are in the committee.

There is also some left over matters from the ROS days that may be pertinent to this review. I leave that for you to judge. Now on the main committee, there are elected representatives and there are appointed ones. I tried to argue when I was sacked from PICA that elected committee members cannot be sacked without grounds and they also have the right of appeal at the AGM should they be so sacked. On the other hand appointed committee members only serve at the pleasure of the President and so no grounds is necessary for their removal. There was no resolution on this issue at that time and we are now under COS. But this issue may now become relevant again. Lets see.

Simply put, elected officials have more authority since they are mandated by the States and so speaks on their behalf and appointed officials do not have that clout.

Ok.

Anything that bears the word Malaysian belongs to MCF. And so the MCF main committee as well as the selection chair has all the say. And so the Malaysian Masters belongs to MCF and Peter is merely allowed to organise on behalf of MCF. If say Peter organises an event and calls it Peter's Masters then he will have more say. Are we clear on this? As such, the announcement from Peter as the organiser is not the final word on this matter. Lets look at it this way. The next Malaysian Masters can be organised by say Fadli if MCF is not satisfied with the way Peter runs things.

So how is what I have said above relevant? I believe that the selection chair is an elected official just like I was an elected official sitting on the selection chair in PICA. As an elected official mandated by the State Affiliates, the selection chair has the responsibility to canvass for the opinions of the States before agreeing to any selection criteria.

He should also not fear being sacked just because some committee members want a certain criteria. According to most Constitutions he cannot be sacked without grounds and if he is so sacked then he has the right of appeal to the people who voted him in and that is the State Affiliates. And if he has done a good job according to the wishes of the State Affiliates without fear or favour then he should be elected in again no matter what anyone else in the committee thinks or says.

We need to be very clear on this. MCF is an NGO which belongs to the chess community that finds its expression via the delegates who voted you in at the AGM. The selection chair is answerable to nobody else. Thank you for your time.

Tomorrow, the review proper.