Vorstandssitzung vom / Séance du comité du 13.12.2011

Anwesend / Présents: Denis Simonet,_Pascal Gloor_, Thomas Bruderer, Cassandra Ruppen
Abwesend:  Pascal Vizeli
Ort / Lieu: Mumble
Leitung / Présidence: Denis Simonet
Protokoll / Procès-verbal: Cassandra Ruppen

Beginn / Début: 21:06

Mitteilungen / Communications


Traktanden / Ordre du jour Protokoll

Annahme vom Protokoll / Procès-verbal: Approbation du procès-verbal

Ja / Oui: 4
Nein / Non: 0
Enthaltung / Blanc: 0
Antrag einstimmig angenommen
Requête acceptée à l'unanimité

Motion #2155: IRC Server einrichten

eingereicht durch: Thomas Bruderer

Möchten wir Denis Simonet den Auftragen geben möglichst Schnell einen IRC Server einzurichten?

Nachtrag von Thomas Bruderer: Möglicherweise bereits Unnötig - die AG DI hat jetzt eigeninitiative an den tag gelegt

Thomas Bruderer: Der IRC Server war letzte Woche 2 Tage down. Entwerder Denis oder die AG DI soll nun den Auftrag erhalten dies zu fixen

Denis Simonet: Ich könnte es mit Stefan Ott zusammen machen.

Thomas Bruderer: Dann würde ich meinen Antrag dahingehend abändern.

Sollen wir Denis Simonet und Stefan Ott den Auftrag geben den IRC Server zu fixen?

Ja / Oui: 3
Nein / Non: 1 (Denis Simonet)
Enthaltung / Blanc: 0
Antrag  angenomment
Requête acceptée

Motion #2159: PPI CoA Ruling 2011.1 anfechten

eingereicht durch: Thomas Bruderer

Beantragt von Stefan Thöni, Moira Brüllisauer, Thomas Bruderer

Wir haben 3 Hauptforderungen mit einigen unterforderungen welche wir dem PPI Board und dem PPI CoA zustellen möc hten:

Statuten PPI:

Court of Arbitration ruling n°2011-1, December the 9th The Pirate Party International Court of Arbitration has taken an own-intended decision to decide of the validity of various points of the procedure of the November 22th vacant seats in the PPI board statement by the PPI board, and the following referendum, after various observations were made about potential breach of the statutes, including by the Pirate Party of Germany.

The Court of Arbitration has stated that it had the exclusive power to declare the vacancy of the PPI board seat of Finlay Archibald, so the PPI board statement was irregular. The Court has also confirmed that the PPI board cannot appoint successors without breaching the Statutes, and therefore declared invalid option 1.b) of the referendum. The Court reminded that an online voting system for PPI votes such as an online General Assembly is possible without breaching the Statutes or contradicting the pirate movement core values. The Court has also
confirmed the vacancy of both seats at the moment of the PPI statement and referendum, and then ruled that the irregularities and Statutes breaching were not significant enough to make the referendum invalid. Eventually the Court of Arbitration declared irregular the PPI board statement and invalid the choice 1.b) of the referendum, but validated the rest of the procedure and the referendum result. This decision comes into effect immediately.

*Court of Arbitration ruling n°2011-1, December the 9th *

  • PPI board vacant seats in the PPI board statement of November 22nd and PPI board vacant seats referendum of November 22nd-29th.


  • Given the PPI Statutes,
  • Given the November 22th vacant seats in the PPI board statement by the PPI board,
  • Given the November 22nd-29th referendum by the PPI board,
  • Given the observations made by Pirate Party of Germany on November 29th,
  • Given the own-intended decision of the Court of Arbitration to decide of the validity of various points of the procedure.


  1. Considering Paul Da Silva has resigned from being a PPI board memberon May 2, 2011.
  2. Considering Finlay Archibald has not come for a long time to PPI board meetings, nor answered to any attempts to contact him.
  3. Considering paragraph XIII. (8) of the PPI Statutes handles PPI board seats vacancy for both cases : A Board member may resign at any moment. After resignation, death, long term disease or other situation in which a Member of the Board does not execute his functions for more than three months, his seat becomes vacant.
  4. Considering PPI board has stated the loss of Finlay Archibald's PPI board membership on November 22th.
  5. Considering neither Paul Da Silva, Finlay Archibald, or their PPI Member of origin has contested the November 22th statement.
  6. Considering the Court of Arbitration has decided on its own initiative to study the validity of the November 22th statement.
  7. Considering paragraph XIVa. of the PPI Statutes, defining the Court of Arbitration powers, imply that the Court of Arbitration shall pronounce the PPI board seats vacancy if it can cause dispute, complains or Statutes breach.
  8. Considering that the PPI board could therefore announce the vacancy of Paul Da Silva PPI board seat, as his resignation was clear and cannot be contested.
  9. Considering that, on the contrary, the PPI board shall not have decided the vacancy of Finlay Archibald PPI board seat, as it is subject to interpretation and this ruling is subject to dissent ; which means that the Court of Arbitration had the exclusive power to decide about it, and that therefore the November 22th statement by the PPI board was not regular.
  10. Considering that the Court of Arbitration confirms both Paul Da Silva and Finlay Archibald's PPI board seats vacancy at the time of the statement, with the result that the PPI board statement irregularity does not make the following referendum invalid.


  1. Considering Pirate Party of Germany has issued doubts, about the validity of the PPI board nominating additional board members option, and on electronic voting.
  2. Considering the Court of Arbitration has decided on its own initiative to decide on the validity of such claims.
  3. Considering Statutes Amendment Proposal 3 to the PPI Statutes, adopted during the 2011 PPI General Assembly in Friedrichshafen, removed the following sentence : In case of vacancy a substitute may be appointed by the Board until the next General Assembly.
  4. Considering no part of the actual Statutes allows appointments by the board.
  5. Considering paragraph XII. (4) of the PPI Statutes states that the Board is elected by the General Assembly at the regular sessions or if an extraordinary session is requested for that purpose.
  6. Considering that, in consequence, choice 1.b of the PPI board vacant seats referendum would constitute a breach of the statutes.
  7. Considering that only one PPI member had voted choice 1.b.
  8. Considering that, following the claim of invalidity of this vote, this PPI member has asked to change his vote to another option.
  9. Considering the Court of Arbitration has accepted this demand.
  10. Considering there is therefore no voters for proposition 1.b and therefore no further measures have to be taken.
  11. Considering that no procedure of electronic voting that guarantee, at the same time, anonymity and secrecy of the vote, and integrity and equality, has been proposed to the PPI.
  12. Considering that the use of electronic voting, and in particular any electronic voting machine, therefore implies to sacrifice either a part of secrecy or a part of integrity.
  13. Considering that giving up voting integrity, like it is the case for all known electronic voting systems with full secrecy of the vote, would therefore be in contradiction with the pirate movement core values.
  14. Considering that giving up secrecy of the vote, depending on the context, can be either in contradiction with the pirate movement core values or not.
  15. Considering that full equality of information is not reachable in practice, and therefore only a level of highness of equality can be appreciated.
  16. Considering the remote voting procedure announced by the PPI board will be a public ballot procedure, and therefore ensures full integrity of the vote in exchange of giving up secrecy.
  17. Considering the voters are not citizens, but PPI members, which means public organizations, and that therefore they have in general a duty to make their decisions as transparent as possible to their members, and are less subject to intimidation or threat.
  18. Considering that this implies that the publication of the vote of PPI members in a partial board election would therefore not breach the pirate movement core values, while it would be the case for the vote of citizens.
  19. Considering the PPI board stated that the vote of each PPI member for the current election shall be kept secret by the Court of Arbitration until the deadline for the votes, which would give a reasonable level of equality to an asynchronous General Assembly.
  20. Considering a synchronous General Assembly, which means an online meeting session, could - provided it respects the Statutes - give similar chances to any PPI member to change his vote until the General Assembly agrees on the decision, which gives a reasonable level of equality to a synchronous General Assembly.
  21. Considering that it results from the above that an online General Assembly would not by itself breach the Statutes.


Article 1) November 22th vacant seats in the PPI board statement by the PPI board is irregular, but with the reserve expressed at considering 10 the two seats vacancy is confirmed.
Article 2) November 22nd-29th PPI board referendum's choice 1.b of the PPI board vacant seats referendum is contrary to the PPI Statutes and therefore invalid.
Article 3) With the reserve expressed at considerings 20, 29 and 30, the rest of the referendum is valid in regard of the Statutes.
Article 4) The current decision will be published on the PPI website. Deliberate by the Pirate Party International Court of Arbitration on December 9th of 2011, attended by the followings : Sven Clement, Marco Confalonieri, Arturo Martínez and Maxime Rouquet.

Mail PPDE:

Dear Board of the Pirate Party International,

Dear Boards of the international Pirate Parties,

on the 22th of November the board of the PPI called for a postal referendum regarding the vacant seats in the PPI board. In this referendum two questions have been asked, each with three options given.

Regarding question one: The Pirate Party Germany dismisses ALL options. This vote and the following proposition have been approved by an unanimous acclamation of the board of the Pirate Party Germany. Regarding option A: A purely online general assembly is not acceptable to the Pirate Party Germany. The Pirate Party Germany strongly opposes the usage of electronic voting machines. An electronic voting machine can never fulfill all critical requirements for a real democratic vote (secrecy/anonymity, integrity, equality) at once. In addition sub-requirements (e.g. unavailability of prior knowledge regarding existing votes to any participant) may not be fulfilled without a complicated secrecy-sheme.
As the Pirate Party Germany opposes the usage of electronic voting machines, we cannot and we must not support the usage of any such sheme in the Pirate Party International.

Regarding option B: An appointment made by the Board cannot fullfill the requirements of grassroot democratic organizations. One of the major goals of the Pirate Party Germany is to change the style of politics and to enable a larger and more direct partizipation of citizens and party members in democratic processes. Thus we cannot and we must not support a board to appoint its own members. In addition we believe that the Statutes of the PPI do not allow an appointment of board members (see section XII.4).

Thus Option C would be the only valid option. In contrast we propose, that the Pirate Party International should prepare and held its next real General Assembly as soon as possible.
The Pirate Party Germany would be prepared to host this assembly. But we would strongly favor a General Assembly outside of Europe (e.g. in Africa to show support for the new democratic movements).

Regarding question 2: We would prefer a real General Assembly.

Kind regards,
Sebastian Nerz
Federal Chairman Pirate Party Germany

Thomas Bruderer: Der Aufbau des Urteils finden wir eigentlich ganz gut. Es geht aber nicht, dass das CoA ohne Kläger beginnt zu richten.Wir haben aber auch zu einigen Considerations
was zu sagen weil es zu e-Voting unwahre Aussagen hat die gegen Pi-Vote sprechen.

Denis Simonet:Was verstehst du unter anfechten?

Thomas Bruderer: Das Urteil ginge dann ans CoA zurück und sie müssten über sich selber richten.

Denis Simonet: Dann ist nur zu hoffen, dass es genügend unbefangene Richter gibt sonst müsste das Urteil an ein belgisches Gericht weitergezogen werden. Das Urteil ist eh nichtig egal ob wir es einklagen.

Thomas Bruderer; Das stimmt natürlich. Wir schreiben aber challenge es ist also nicht eindeutig ob wir sie nur informieren oder einklagen. Wir fechten Punkt 2 und die 4 Unterpunkte an sowie Punkt 3 die Verfahrensregeln des CoA dort steht tbd. Der CoA hat sich also noch gar nicht konstituiert.

Denis Simonet: Ich habe noch eine kleine Ergänzung gemacht.

Thomas Bruderer: Ja ich habe es gesehen.

Wollen wir die CoA-Ruling 2011-1 anfechten mit folgendem Text:

Ja / Oui: 4
Nein / Non: 0
Enthaltung / Blanc: 0
Antrag einstimmig angenommen
Requête acceptée à l'unanimité


Varium 2148 PV Protokolle

eingeriecht durch: Andreas Eigenmann

Guten Tag

Wie ihr sicherlich wisst sind noch nicht alle PV Protokolle erstellt/veröffentlicht.
Namentlich fehlen mindestens:
2009 - Dezember
2010 - September
2011 - Februar
2011 - August

Thomas Bruderer: Das letzte PV Protokoll ist im Vorstands-Wiki und auf der HP ersichtlich. Die alten PV Protokolle sind auf dem offiziellen Weg per Mail an alle Mitglieder versendet worden.

Cassandra Ruppen: Ich kann die alten Protokolle gerne veröffentlichen wenn ich sie bekomme.

Denis Simonet: Thomas und ich schicken dir die Protokolle welche wir haben.

Varium 2165 Jahresbericht/Rückblick 2011

eingereicht durch: Andreas Eigenmann

Bis am 26.Dezember wird die deutsche Version des Newsletters erstellt.
Er sollte einen Jahresrückblick des Vorstandes enthalten. Als Inhalt habe ich mir vorgestellt, dass alle wichtigen Ereignisse kurz erläutert werden. Ausserdem noch ein paar erfreuliche Wendungen und vl noch ein persönlicher Eindruck was ihr als Vorstand alles gleistet habt.
Dieser Text sollte so geschrieben sein, dass man ihn im Newsletter und auch auf der Website veröffentlichen kann.

Denis Simonet; Bis jetzt habe ich den geschrieben, dieser Bericht war aber immer aufs Vereinsjahr bezogen. Mir ist das bis zum 26.12 etwas knapp aber ich probiere es.

Cassandra Ruppen: Ich werde so gut wie möglich unterstützen.

Thomas Bruderer: Ich werde sicher von den AGs her noch Infos einfliessen lassen.

Denis Simonet: Kannst du aus der Romandie berichten.

Pascal Gloor: Ja kann ich machen.

Varium 3 Piratenzeitung

Denis Simonet: Wir haben am BPT gesehen, dass die deutschen Piraten jeweils eine Zeitung machen. Wir fanden das sehr cool und ich habe mir überlegt wir könnten das auch in der Schweiz machen und z.B. mit der PV-Einladung versenden. Bei 5000 Exemplaren (A4, einmal gefaltet 12 Seiten) würde der Druck ca. 3000 Fr kosten und das Porto wäre 56 Rappen.

Cassandra Ruppen: Ich finde es eine coole Idee, es ist ein anderes Medium und spricht wohl auch andere Mitglieder an.

Thomas Bruderer: Ich finde es auch eine gute Idee

Pascal Gloor: Ich auch.

Fragen der Mitglieder

keine Fragen!

Ende / Fin : 21:44

Für den Vorstand / Pour le comité

Denis Simonet
Ipsach, 13.12.2011

Für das Protokoll / Pour le procès-verbal

Cassandra Ruppen
Zürich, 13.12.2011

Also available in: PDF HTML TXT