Rule Change Proposal 22-02: Constitution – general

Proposal 27.2 - Suspension
The first sentence of the reasons is "No need to limit the suspension duration" and in the proposal it is said 6 months. So one of the reasons given for the change and the proposal are inconsistent, is there a need to limit the suspension or not?
Only WS can suspend the eligibility of a sailor, not a Class Association. A Class Association may suspend the Membership of a sailor but not his/her eligibility.
Also, only a penalty under RRS2 is covered by the proposal but not a penalty under RRS69 (misconduct). They are different and have different procedure under the rules.
Also, the fact of having a IJ in an event does not necessarily mean that the IJ is properly constitute according to Appendix N. When that happens, the right of appeal is not denied.
Also, there is no IJ in, I would say, 95% of the calendar. So the proposal only covers International Regattas (5% of the total regattas).
Also, even in the case that a penalty is applied to a sailor because of breaking RRS2 or RRS69, the IJ will report to MNA and WS and an investigation will be open to decide if more actions are required from them. Suspending the Membership (remember, not the eligibility) of a sailor based only in the results of a hearing may be premature. It is necessary to wait until WS or MNA resolution so no fundamental rights are denied.
Also, the proposal is only for "Members". What if the penalty occurs while the sailor is not SCIRA Member? As you well know, sailors does not become a Member (pay their duties with the Class) on January the 1st; a lot of them pay their duties during the year.
So we have a proposal that does not cover most of the events in the calendar, does not cover penalties under RRS69, does not cover the time while the sailor is not a SCIRA Member but sails a Snipe Regatta (club regatta, for instance), does not cover IJ decisions when not properly constitute, but create defenselessness on the sailor by denying his/her fundamental rights.
I think this proposal needs more to think about before approving it.

A comment to 27.2 – Suspension
I think this is serious enough to take a closer look and study it deeper.
In the reasons, the first sentence is “No need to limit the suspension duration” but in the proposal there is a limit of 6 months. Limit needed or not? There is a conflict of what it is exposed in the reasons and what is said the proposal.
What is the meaning of “proper suspension”? There is no option in the proposal other than 6 months regardless how serious was the incident. I think a graded suspension system should be added to the proposal and the suspension will depend on the incident.
The proposal refers to “suspension of eligibility” but the eligibility of a sailor can be suspended only by WS or MNA, not a Class Association. The Class Association may suspend the Membership of the sailor but never his/her eligibility.
Also, the proposal refers to penalties as a consequence of violation of RRS2 so any decision from a RRS69 (misconduct) hearing is not covered here. RRS2 and RRS69 are different and have different procedures. So a sailor may be penalized by an IJ for an RRS69 infraction and his/her “membership” (not eligibility as explained before) cannot be suspended because of the wording of the proposal.
Also, the right of appeal is only denied when an IJ is properly constituted according to Appendix N or any of the reasons in RRS70.5 and stated in the Notice of Race. In any other cases, the right of appeal is always an option for the sailor. So, the scope of this proposal is limited to a few regattas a year. National Championships, and Junior, Master and Women International Regattas are out of this proposal since I have never seen an IJ properly constitute according to Appendix N for these events.
Also, the scope of the proposal is Members of SCIRA but what happen if the sailor is penalized while he is not a Member of SCIRA? As we all know, not every sailor renew his/her membership on January 1st, so we can find that a sailor is penalized under RRS2 but he/she was not a Member of SCIRA at that time and become a Member (pay his/her duties with the Class) in a later time.
So the proposal convers only infractions to RRS2, only Members and only when IJ is constituted. I think it is very limited for the spirit of the proposal. I agree that SCIRA should take further actions when a sailor is penalized under RRS2 or RRS69 but always protecting the fundamental rights of the sailor. When a sailor is penalized in this case, the IJ shall report to his/her MNA and WS and they will open an investigation. MNA and WS will take further actions (or not) once the investigation is closed. I would propose to suspend membership of a sailor after, and only after, the decision of WS or MNA and SCIRA decision should be based on a graded suspension system.

I found out that some of the proposals of 22-02 are based on an old version of the Constitution.
The Board passed the proposal 21-01 to be in force in 2022. That passed proposal already deleted Bi-annual and includes video conference meetings.
So, this proposal 22-02 is not based on the updated 2022 Constitution.