Amendment 5. In Article IX, section (7) of the bylaws, the current language is deleted and replaced with: "(7) If national or regional charges have been filed against a member in accordance with section (5) or (6) of this Article, and the member resigns or does not renew membership before the hearing process is completed, the body having jurisdiction at that point in time may complete the hearings process if it feels such action is appropriate, according the accused the same due process as if the resignation or non-renewal had not occurred. If the body chooses not to continue the hearings process upon the accused's resignation or failure to renew, and the accused rejoins, the accused shall face the same charges and hearings." [note: The current language is: (7) Charges brought against a member under (5) or (6) of this Article shall not be considered dropped if the member resigns or allows his or her membership to lapse. Upon rejoining, the member shall face the same charges and hearings.]

In the Mensa election that will be held between April 15 and May 31 this year, you'll be asked to vote on seven proposed bylaws amendments as well as on candidates for AMC office. The full text of one of those amendments, Amendment 5, exactly as it was printed in the October 2002 Bulletin, is shown in the box on the right. Do you know what it's about? It's hard to tell from the information presented, isn't it?

Sections (5), (6), and (7) of Article IX of the bylaws deal with Mensa's hearings process. If a member of Mensa does something that's damaging to the society, he can be charged with an act inimical to Mensa; the validity of the charge and any sanctions that might result from it are determined by a hearings committee. Thus, the "national or regional charges" referred to in Article IX, section (7), are charges of acts inimical to Mensa, and the "body having jurisdiction" is a national or regional hearings committee.

The proposed change to Article IX, section (7), is this: " . . . the body having jurisdiction at that point in time may complete the hearings process if it feels such action is appropriate. . . ." What that means is that if a member who has been charged with acts inimical to Mensa resigns or does not renew his membership, the hearings committee can still hold a hearing against him on those charges. Previously, as the "current language" says, a hearing could not be held against a member who had resigned or lapsed; rather, the resigned or lapsed member would face the same charges when and if he rejoined or renewed.

It is important to note that, according to Article XII of the bylaws, the bylaws cannot be changed except "on the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the ballots cast by mail." The AMC cannot change the bylaws by board action.

The AMC carries out the routine business of the society by passing motions on agenda items at its meetings. In the jargon of Mensa, a motion that's approved by the AMC is instantly known as an "ASIE," or Action Still in Effect.

Now let's take a look at ASIE 2001-062, originally moved by Dave Remine and passed on July 7, 2001 (last amended December 1, 2001, by ASIE 2001-082). Part (b) of that ASIE says, "If national or regional charges have been filed against a member in accordance with Article IX, sections 5 or 6 of the American Mensa Bylaws, and the member resigns or does not renew membership before the hearings process is completed, the Body may complete the hearings process if it feels such action is appropriate, according the accused the same due process as if the resignation or non-renewal had not occurred." Does that wording sound familiar to you?

I agree with your conclusion. The AMC did try to modify the bylaws with an ASIE, which is contrary to the bylaws. Dan Wilterding, RVC 6, saw this conflict and has been trying since September 2001 to get the AMC to rescind that motion, but to no avail. As of the AMC meeting of December 2002, ASIE 2001-062 is still on the books.

As you can see, Amendment 5 essentially duplicates an AMC action that's been in existence for a year and a half. Here's the trap with that: assuming that the AMC is not going to rescind ASIE 2001-062, the provision permitting a hearings committee to hold a hearing for a member who has lapsed or resigned will remain in force even if Amendment 5 fails. A kind of Catch-22, even if illegal.

The second thing wrong with this amendment is that it permits the hearings committee to hold a hearing against someone who is not a member of Mensa. Mensa rules and regulations do not apply to people who are not members of the society. How can you suspend or expel someone who's not a member?

Further, Amendment 5 cannot be considered in isolation. The hearings process has been further complicated — polluted — by ASIE 2002-121, adopted on March 16, 2002 (see "If You're Going to Do It, Then Do It Right," in the March 2002 issue of Going Forward. That ASIE permits a hearings committee to levy sanctions against a person accused of acts inimical to Mensa without actually having a hearing. The circumstance in which the hearings committee would elect not to have a hearing is when an accused chooses not to attend the hearing. It's highly likely that a resigned or lapsed member would not be particularly interested in attending a Mensa hearing of charges against him. The combination of ASIE 2002-121 and Amendment 5 would permit a hearings committee to levy sanctions against a nonmember without actually having a hearing.

One purpose of the hearings process is to reduce the risk of lawsuit against Mensa for expelling a member whimsically or arbitrarily. Hearings accord due process to the accused. Ironically, ASIE 2002-121 and Amendment 5 together increase the very risk that the hearings process seeks to reduce.

Here's how that could happen: a member facing charges of acts inimical to Mensa resigns, and the hearings committee decides to continue the hearing anyway. The resigned member chooses not to participate in the hearing. The heaviest sanctions a hearings committee can levy are suspension and expulsion — but you can't suspend or expel someone who's not a member. The most you can do is prevent them from renewing or rejoining. So the hearings committee, without actually having a hearing because neither the accused nor representation is present, decides that the accused cannot rejoin Mensa. Such an action would amount to an institutional blackball handed down by a star chamber.

The AMC is insulting the membership with Amendment 5 as well as proceeding quite unwisely. As things stand right now, if Amendment 5 fails, the illegal ASIE 2001-062, which says the same thing, will remain in force. In other words, the AMC will ignore its own bylaws and get the result it wants, no matter how the membership votes.

I urge you, then, to do three things:

  • Vote NO on Amendment 5 when you receive your ballot in the April issue of the Bulletin.
  • Write to your RVC and the general officers and demand that they rescind ASIE 2001-062.
  • Write to your RVC and the general officers and demand that they rescind ASIE 2002-121.

Tell a friend.

Richard Amyx

Contents | Next Article