|
Where is the Accountability in Kerper Dwanyen’s OLM
A Special Commentary
By Staff Reporter PPN
During the OLM Elections, every one was talking about accountability. It was the key point of all the
candidates. Kerper Dwanyen made it look like he was the most honest guy in the whole world and was ready to change business
as usual. But after the elections the idea of accountability has been thrown through the window.
First, what is accountability? According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, Accountability is the quality or state of being accountable, especially: an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one's actions.
In leadership roles, accountability is the acknowledgment and assumption of responsibility for actions, products, decisions, and policies including the administration, governance and implementation within the scope of the role or employment position and encompassing the obligation to report explain and be answerable for resulting consequences.
In the OLM, that has not been the case. For example:
1. The OLM constitution under Article VI. Section ii States in count 4, “The Chairman of the Board of Directors shall be a signatory to the organization’s account. But Kerper Dwanyen has refused for the Chairman of the Board to be a signatory to the account. Where is the accountability?
2. Kerper Dwanyen operated in a dictatorial fashion, not considering the views of other or listening to any of his committee chairs. This led to several if not all the committee to either resign from or abandon the organization. His behavior with the board is a clear indication of such behavior. If he is refusing to listen to the board, which is higher then him, would he listen to a committee chair who is serving at his will and pleasure?
3. The OLM President appoints or picks his vice president, which is his exclusive right. But for the purpose of accountability and check and balance, it must meet the advice and consent of the Board. Kerper Dwanyen decided to appoint his vice and induct him without the input and participation of the Board. Where is the accountability?
A Special Commentary
By Staff Reporter PPN
During the OLM Elections, every one was talking about accountability. It was the key point of all the
candidates. Kerper Dwanyen made it look like he was the most honest guy in the whole world and was ready to change business
as usual. But after the elections the idea of accountability has been thrown through the window. First, what is accountability? According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, Accountability is the quality or state of being accountable, especially: an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one's actions.
In leadership roles, accountability is the acknowledgment and assumption of responsibility for actions, products, decisions, and policies including the administration, governance and implementation within the scope of the role or employment position and encompassing the obligation to report explain and be answerable for resulting consequences.
In the OLM, that has not been the case. For example:
1. The OLM constitution under Article VI. Section ii States in count 4, “The Chairman of the Board of Directors shall be a signatory to the organization’s account. But Kerper Dwanyen has refused for the Chairman of the Board to be a signatory to the account. Where is the accountability?
2. Kerper Dwanyen operated in a dictatorial fashion, not considering the views of other or listening to any of his committee chairs. This led to several if not all the committee to either resign from or abandon the organization. His behavior with the board is a clear indication of such behavior. If he is refusing to listen to the board, which is higher then him, would he listen to a committee chair who is serving at his will and pleasure?
3. The OLM President appoints or picks his vice president, which is his exclusive right. But for the purpose of accountability and check and balance, it must meet the advice and consent of the Board. Kerper Dwanyen decided to appoint his vice and induct him without the input and participation of the Board. Where is the accountability?
4. Without the submission and approval of the organization’s budget, Kerper Dwanyen
has being using the organization’s funds however he chooses. He signed checks to himself in the amount of $1,000.00
for non-contractual rent; used several hundred dollars for unapproved travel expense. Where is the accountability?
5. Because Kerper Dwanyen does not want to be answerable to any one, he claims the Board of Directors is an Advisory Board. But the OLM Constitution in Article VI refers to them as the “Board of Directors.” Section II. Count. 1 states that, “the Board of Directors shall advise the executive committee on the general management of the organization, and shall exercise all laws subject to the provisions of the article of incorporation and all appropriate State and Federal Laws.”
Why is Kerper calling them Advisory Board? Does he respect the OLM Constitution? At the same time, Article II Section II. 1. (A) states, ”The President shall be the Chief Executive officer of the organization. He shall exercise general supervision of all operation of the organization upon the approval of the Executive and the Board of Directors.”
6. Using “VETO power” as an affront to the board. Yes, the OLM Constitution has a provision for veto power. The OLM Constitution, in Article II Section III Count 1 (A) States that, The President shall set up committees to assist in the smooth operation of the organization, and shall be empowered with a veto power.” This matter is not the setting up of committees. The question is does the president have absolute veto power?
Only the British has absolute veto. In the United States we practice limited veto (as in the legislative process of the United States, where a two thirds vote in both the House and Senate may override a Presidential veto of legislation).
That is if there was a simple majority of the Board, You will need two-third majority of the Board to over turn it. In this case, the Board has voted 100%; therefore there is no way you can veto that. How can there be any “veto power” exercised here? In fact, the veto is only mentioned in count “D” with reference to the setting up committees to assist in the smooth operation of the organization.
How can you appoint your vice president and refuse to have him vetted by the Board for the necessary advice. The Vice President is not a committee. It is common knowledge that one way to ensure accountability is through the principle of check and balance.
5. Because Kerper Dwanyen does not want to be answerable to any one, he claims the Board of Directors is an Advisory Board. But the OLM Constitution in Article VI refers to them as the “Board of Directors.” Section II. Count. 1 states that, “the Board of Directors shall advise the executive committee on the general management of the organization, and shall exercise all laws subject to the provisions of the article of incorporation and all appropriate State and Federal Laws.”
Why is Kerper calling them Advisory Board? Does he respect the OLM Constitution? At the same time, Article II Section II. 1. (A) states, ”The President shall be the Chief Executive officer of the organization. He shall exercise general supervision of all operation of the organization upon the approval of the Executive and the Board of Directors.”
6. Using “VETO power” as an affront to the board. Yes, the OLM Constitution has a provision for veto power. The OLM Constitution, in Article II Section III Count 1 (A) States that, The President shall set up committees to assist in the smooth operation of the organization, and shall be empowered with a veto power.” This matter is not the setting up of committees. The question is does the president have absolute veto power?
Only the British has absolute veto. In the United States we practice limited veto (as in the legislative process of the United States, where a two thirds vote in both the House and Senate may override a Presidential veto of legislation).
That is if there was a simple majority of the Board, You will need two-third majority of the Board to over turn it. In this case, the Board has voted 100%; therefore there is no way you can veto that. How can there be any “veto power” exercised here? In fact, the veto is only mentioned in count “D” with reference to the setting up committees to assist in the smooth operation of the organization.
How can you appoint your vice president and refuse to have him vetted by the Board for the necessary advice. The Vice President is not a committee. It is common knowledge that one way to ensure accountability is through the principle of check and balance.
In order to ensure there
is accountability the leadership needs to adhere to the constitution and other internal rules and norms of the organization.
The leadership must learn to listen and collaborate with all stakeholders and involve them in the decision making process.
The leadership must ascribe to democratic values and principles and any thing short of this is dictatorship. In this modern
era, it is difficult to believe there are still tyrants in our local organization.
In modern days, a tyrant carries modern connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his or her own interests or the interests of a small organization or an oligarchy over the best interests of the general population or membership, which the tyrant governs or controls. There must be the input of other people.
But in Kerper Dwanyen’s it all about him. What do you expect of a former warlord? Anything better then that? He sees himself as the lord and the gospel. What he says must be final. Kerper Dwanyen must dictate and the rest say, “yes sir, yes sir, yes sir.” Where in this technological and intellectual world will you find that? It present, the OLM is in the worst state then any time in the history of the organization. He has failed the OLM; he has failed the people, shame on him. But this is accountability for Kerper Dwanyen in “his OLM.” The OLM that you are a member of desires better, act now or never!
In modern days, a tyrant carries modern connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his or her own interests or the interests of a small organization or an oligarchy over the best interests of the general population or membership, which the tyrant governs or controls. There must be the input of other people.
But in Kerper Dwanyen’s it all about him. What do you expect of a former warlord? Anything better then that? He sees himself as the lord and the gospel. What he says must be final. Kerper Dwanyen must dictate and the rest say, “yes sir, yes sir, yes sir.” Where in this technological and intellectual world will you find that? It present, the OLM is in the worst state then any time in the history of the organization. He has failed the OLM; he has failed the people, shame on him. But this is accountability for Kerper Dwanyen in “his OLM.” The OLM that you are a member of desires better, act now or never!
 |
|
|
Enter supporting content here