From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is one of a collection of articles which has a direct, or indirect relevance for the development of the UDP. Blogger Ref http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Universal_Debating_Project
The Chatham House Rule or rules is a system for holding debates and discussion panels on controversial issues, named after the headquarters of the Royal Institute of International Affairs (situated in St. James's Square, London), also known as Chatham House, where the rule originated in June 1927.
At a meeting held under the Chatham House Rule, anyone who comes to the meeting is free to use information from the discussion, but is not allowed to reveal who made any comment. It is designed to increase openness of discussion.
The rule allows people to speak as individuals and to express views that may not be those of their organisations, and therefore, encourages free discussion. Speakers are free to voice their own opinions, without concern for their personal reputation or their official duties and affiliations. The Chatham House Rule resolves a boundary problem faced by many communities of practice, in that it permits acknowledgement of the community or conversation, while protecting the freedom of interaction that is necessary for the community to carry out its conversations. It is designed to reduce the risk of what has come to be described as groupthink, where unpopular views are excluded from discussion, reducing the range of opinions an organisation can discuss.
The aim of the rule is to guarantee anonymity to those speaking within its walls so that better international relations may be achieved. The rule is now used internationally as an aid to free discussion.[3] The original rule of 1927 was refined in October 1992 and again in 2002.[1] Chatham House has translated the rule into Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish and Russian.[4]
The rule is a contrast (or a compromise) between private meetings, where revealing what was said in the meeting is forbidden, and on the record events where the discussion is completely public and attributed.
Generally, the Chatham House Rule is imposed as a condition of being allowed to attend a meeting or event: all participants are understood to have agreed that it would be conducive to free discussion that they should be subject to the rule for the relevant part of the meeting. The success of the rule may depend upon it being considered morally binding, particularly in circumstances where a failure to comply with the rule may not result in sanction.
At a meeting held under the Chatham House Rule, anyone who comes to the meeting is free to use information from the discussion, but is not allowed to reveal who made any comment. It is designed to increase openness of discussion.
Contents
[hide]The Rule[edit]
Since its refinement in 2002, the rule states:[1]When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.Some times the reference is made to "Chatham House rules", plural.[2]
Purpose[edit]
At a meeting held under the Chatham House Rule, anyone who comes to the meeting is free to use information from the discussion, but is not allowed ever to reveal the identity, employer or political party of the person making a comment. It is designed to increase openness of discussion of public policy and current affairs, as it allows people to express and discuss controversial opinions and arguments without suffering the risk of dismissal from their job, and with a clear separation from the opinion and the view of their employer.The rule allows people to speak as individuals and to express views that may not be those of their organisations, and therefore, encourages free discussion. Speakers are free to voice their own opinions, without concern for their personal reputation or their official duties and affiliations. The Chatham House Rule resolves a boundary problem faced by many communities of practice, in that it permits acknowledgement of the community or conversation, while protecting the freedom of interaction that is necessary for the community to carry out its conversations. It is designed to reduce the risk of what has come to be described as groupthink, where unpopular views are excluded from discussion, reducing the range of opinions an organisation can discuss.
The aim of the rule is to guarantee anonymity to those speaking within its walls so that better international relations may be achieved. The rule is now used internationally as an aid to free discussion.[3] The original rule of 1927 was refined in October 1992 and again in 2002.[1] Chatham House has translated the rule into Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish and Russian.[4]
The rule is a contrast (or a compromise) between private meetings, where revealing what was said in the meeting is forbidden, and on the record events where the discussion is completely public and attributed.
Generally, the Chatham House Rule is imposed as a condition of being allowed to attend a meeting or event: all participants are understood to have agreed that it would be conducive to free discussion that they should be subject to the rule for the relevant part of the meeting. The success of the rule may depend upon it being considered morally binding, particularly in circumstances where a failure to comply with the rule may not result in sanction.
Concern over ECB use[edit]
In May 2015, a somewhat bungled release of an originally rules-bound speech by ECB board member Benoît Cœuré triggered broader attention to the bank's use of the system. The Cœuré speech ended up appearing to move currency, stock and bond markets. In the aftermath, other recent ECB invocations of the rules regarding a question-and-answer session and opening remarks for Cœuré, respectively, by ECB Vice President Vitor Constancio and another member of the board, Peter Praet, also gained attention. An ECB governing council member Boštjan Jazbec of Slovenia also had, the same month, held a Q&A under the rules.[2]See also[edit]
References[edit]
- ^ Jump up to: a b "Chatham House Rule". About. UK: Chatham House. Retrieved 2014-07-14.
- ^ Jump up to: a b Fletcher, Laurence, "ECB error spurs questions about policy disclosures", MarketWatch, May 25, 2015. Retrieved 2015-05-26.
- Jump up ^ Rislakki, Jukka (February 24, 2011). "Informaatiouhat mietityttävät sekä virolaisia että suomalaisia" (in Finnish). Finland: Suomen Kuvalehti.
- Jump up ^ "Chatham House Rule Translations", About us (Chatham House).
External links[edit]
- "Chatham House Rule". UK: Chatham House. Retrieved 2014-06-11. With explanation and link to translations in different languages.
No comments:
Post a Comment