No one has mentioned the rules governing protests and penalties I'm using
2005 paragraph numbers. Chapters 8 and 9. These are rather specific, so
protestors and committees know how to proceed and do not have to make up
procedures on the fly.
Rule 8.1: "The right to protest shall rest with any entrant, driver or
official taking part in the competition in question. Each may protest any
decision, act, or omission of the organizers, an official, entrant, driver
or other person connected with the competition, which the protestor believes
is in violation of the Solo Rules, the Supplementary Regulations, or any
conditions attached to the sanctioning of the event by SCCA...A protest
against a car is also a protest against its driver and entrant." Note:
One may not protest a course or event. One must protest the act of the
officials who approved it.
Steve does not say specifically who was named in the protest, he says "the
course was protested" but it was clearly a protest against acts or omissions
of officials or organizers and not against drivers or cars. So this must
have named one or more the chief steward, safety steward, or event chairman.
These are the officials assigned the responsibility in 5. Officials section
for National Tours. A protest that does not name a protested person (or
car) cannot be heard.
So all drivers at the event were not parties to the protest. They were not
informed by the committee when the protest was filed, heard by the protest
committee, allowed to call witnesses etc, all of which is required for
parties to the protest (8.5), and is also required before anyone may be
penalized (9.3).
Yet the penalty was imposed against all drivers, who were not parties to the
protest. (The only allowance to impose a penalty on someone not a party to a
protest is another driver of the same car in the same category.)
And at the same time I see no mention of penalties against the actual
protested parties - officials or organizers.
==================
Also the function of the protest committee is to adjudicate, not to conduct
independent evidence gathering (8.4.2, 8.5). The protest committee hears
evidence, it does not collect it. They could certainly ask the chief
steward to investigate and testify, but the procedure is that the protestor
presents evidence that the course violates the rules, the protested
officials defend it, and the protest committee decides.
==================
And for fans of paradox, since the protest committee members were affected
by the ruling, then they would have to disqualify themselves (8.4.2), which
means they couldn't make the ruling in the first place.
Gregg Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:evolution-discussions@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Steve Hoelscher
Sent: February 20, 2006 17:06
To: evolution-discussions
Subject: [evolution-disc.] Statement from the Ft. Myers National Tour Chief
of Protest (unofficial)
|