Jump to content

Special rules of order

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by The Eloquent Peasant (talk | contribs) at 02:47, 24 August 2023 (Adding short description: "Parliamentary procedure term"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

A special rule of order is parliamentary procedure term for a rule adopted by the organization that relate to procedure or to the duties of officers within meetings.

Explanation and use

[edit]

Special rules of order (with a few exceptions) supersede the rules in an adopted parliamentary authority such as Robert's Rules of Order. These rules continue in existence from one meeting to the next.

Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (RONR)

[edit]

Special rules can be adopted by a two-thirds vote with previous notice or a majority of the entire membership of the group. In conventions, a mixture of standing and special rules that are adopted at the start of the convention are called "convention standing rule" in RONR. These, when adopted as a "package" generally require a two-thirds vote. [1]

The Standard Code (TSC)

[edit]

The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure (TSC), refer to these types of rules as "standing rules", and do not require a simple majority vote without previous notice.[2] One of the most common types of these rules is the rule to set limits on the amount of time, or the number of times, a member may speak in debate or to prohibit some type of motion.

[edit]
  • "Standing rules" in RONR adopted rules that do not relate to procedure.
  • Under TSC "special rules" as rules adopted just for one situation and do not have continuing existence.

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Robert, Henry M. (2011). Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised, 11th ed., p. 15-17 (RONR)
  2. ^ Sturgis, Alice (2001). The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure, 4th ed. (TSC)
  • "Parliamentary Authorities' Rule Shift Function," Parliamentary Journal, January 2005, pp. 3–11