Minutes of the IAHR International Committee Meeting, Toronto, Canada, Wednesday, August 18, 2010 Minutes of the Meeting [To be adopted at the next International Committee Meeting in xx 2013] The President, Prof. Rosalind I. J. Hackett presiding. Prof. Hackett welcomed the delegates of the International Committee and asked the General Secretary, Prof. Tim Jensen, to ascertain that the meeting had been announced and called in accordance with the IAHR By-Laws, Rule 3d. With reference to the General Secretary’s report, IAHR Bulletin, Toronto Congress Edition, 39, 2010, p. 40, Prof. Jensen ascertained that the meeting had been announced first in the IAHR e-Bulletin Supplement, November 2009, and then in a formal notification with attachments and provisional agendas e-mailed on May 7, 2010 to all officers of constituent and applicant member societies. 1. Adoption of the Agenda The agenda was unanimously adopted. 2. Membership Prof. Jensen referred to the Constitution Article 4b, according to which the International Committee of the IAHR is composed of: (i) Two representatives each of the constituent national and regional societies; With reference toRule 5d Prof. Jensen noticed that ”[m]embers of the Executive Committee of the IAHR may not serve as representatives for their constituent societies at the International Committee meetings.” 2.1. Ascertainment of Membership The following members of the Executive Committee of the IAHR were present: President Rosalind I. J. Hackett, Vice-President Akio Tsukimoto, General Secretary Tim Jensen, Deputy General Secretary Ingvild Sælid Gilhus, Membership Secretary Abrahim H. Khan, Publications Officer Brian Bocking, and Member without portfolio Morny Joy. Apologies from: Vice-President Gerrie ter Haar, Internet Officer Francisco Diez de Velasco, and Member without portfolio Alef Theria Wasim. The following representatives of the IAHR member societies and associations were present: With reference to Article 6 and Rule 10, according to which ”A meeting of the International Committee requires a minimum attendance of ten members from a minimum of seven national associations”, Prof. Hackett concluded that the International Committee had a quorum. 2.2 Co-option as Recommended by the Executive Committee The General Secretary informed the International Committee that the Executive Committee had no recommendations for co-option. With reference to the IAHR By-Laws, Rule 6, according to which the International Committee, on the recommendation of the Executive Committee, may allow observers (without voting rights) to participate in its sessions, the General Secretary, Prof. Jensen, said that the Executive Committee recommended that representatives from applicant societies and associations, the chairs of the of Nominating Committee and the Honorary Life Membership Advisory Committee, the Congress Director, the Academic Program Co-Chair, the managing editors of NUMEN, and the candidates for the Executive Committee 2010-2015 be admitted as observers with speaking rights. The IAHR International Committee unanimously agreed to allow the following named persons to be present as observers with speaking rights: Ann Taves & Jack Fitzmier (AAR: American Academy of Religion); Ülo Valk (ESSR: Estonian Society for the Study of Religions); Wouter J. Hanegraaf (ESSWE: European Society of the Study of Western Esotericism); Armin W. Geertz(IACSR: International Association for the Cognitive Science of Religion & Chairof Nominating Committee); Janis Priede (LRPB: Latvian Society for the Study of Religions); Michael Pye (Chair of Honorary Life Membership Advisory Committee); Donald Wiebe (Congress Director); Luther H. Martin (IACSR: International Association for the Cognitive Science of Religion & IAHR Congress Academic Program Co-Chair); Gregory Alles (NUMEN Managing Editor); Gustavo Benavides ((NUMEN Managing Editor); Satoko Fujiwara (candidate IAHR Executive Committee 2010-2015). 3. Minutes of the International Committee Meeting Brno 2008 The General Secretary, Prof. Jensen, informed the members that the minutes (see IAHR Bulletin, Toronto Congress Edition, 39, 2010, pp. 16-29) had been sent to all officers the first time on July 1, 2009 as an attachment to an e-mail, and thus in accordance with the IAHR By-Laws Rule 20b. The minutes were unanimously adopted. 4. Report by the General Secretary Prof. Jensen initially honored the memory of the IAHR Treasurer, Gary Lease, who passed away January 4, 2008, as well as that of IAHR Honorary Life Members Michio Araki, Carsten Colpe, Åke Hultkrantz, Manuel Marzal, and Gerardus Oosthuizen who had all passed away following the IAHR World Congress in Tokyo 2005. Having referred to his detailed written report (printed in the IAHR Bulletin, Toronto Congress Edition, 39, 2010, pp. 16-29), the General Secretary in his oral report focused on the following: 4.1. Executive Committee: Location of Meetings, Changes, and Communications The location within (the enlarged) Europe of most of the annual meetings of the 2000-2005 as well as of the 2005-2010 Executive Committee and of all the intermediary meetings of the International Committee (Marburg 1988, Paris 1993, Hildesheim 1998, Bergen 2003, Brno 2008) stressed the need, Prof. Jensen said, for the incoming Executive Committee to consider how to best implement the IAHR principle of rotation, i.e. moving its Executive and International Committee meetings around the world. Even if there certainly had been very good reasons for locating the meetings in conjunction with IAHR Special and Regional Conferences hosted by European and EASR member associations. The passing away of elected Treasurer, Prof. Gary Lease, early January 2008 was a deep personal loss to the General Secretary and to all other members of the Executive Committee; it was, of course, also a serious blow to the smooth functioning of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee, Prof. Jensen continued, suffered another loss when Prof. Pratap Kumar, in December 2008 resigned with immediate effect. Following Prof. Kumar's resignation, it was decided that the General Secretary function as Acting Treasurer. Referring to an earlier communication (IAHR e-Bulletin Supplement August 2008, Brno Edition, p. 30) regarding the decision to expand the use of electronic communication and limit the publication of a print IAHR Bulletin to the quinquennial publication of a World Congress edition, Prof. Jensen briefly reported on his communication to the member associations. 4.2. IAHR Conferences and Congresses Proceedings from Durban as well as from Tokyo have been published, both available in web versions at the IAHR website. Prof. Jensen extended thanks to the organizers of both congresses as well as to Profs. Brian Bocking, Rosalind I.J. Hackett, and Michael Pye for their editorial work. Planning of SSEASR/IAHR Regional Conference in Bhutan in June 2011 was well underway, and the Executive Committee had awarded a conference in Trondheim, Norway (December 2011 or spring 2012), arranged in cooperation with the Norwegian association, the status of an IAHR Special Conference. Prof. Jensen encouraged member societies and associations to consider hosting an IAHR Special or Regional conference in the period 2011-2014, strongly advising members to approach the IAHR General Secretary at the earliest possible stages of consideration and planning. Early submissions would also permit the Executive Committee to apply in due time for subventions from the CIPSH. 4.3. Finances: Fees, the CIPSH, the IAHR African Trust Fund, and the IAHR Endowment Fund Prof. Jensen said that he wanted to report in greater detail on the finances. This was partly because he considered the improvement in the financial situation one of the most important developments over the past five years, and partly because he could then make his report as Acting Treasurer that much shorter. Prof. Jensen reminded the members about the dire financial situation when the current Executive Committee took office in 2005 and he referred to the words of then General Secretary, Prof. Geertz, who feared that if the situation did not improve, then the IAHR would become more virtual than real, most IAHR events would most likely happen only in economically strong countries, and "once again, we would be back to the routines and power structures of yesteryears, ..." (IAHR Bulletin 38, p. 38) Fortunately, Prof. Jensen continued, the situation had improved considerably, and the IAHR, inter alia, had been able to support the Toronto World Congress, i.e. members in need of support, with 25.000 USD taken from the IAHR general funds, in addition to the 7.000 USD the IAHR had received from the CIPSH. Besides, in 2005-2010, CIPSH grants as well as from the IAHR general funds, had been given to a number of IAHR Special and Regional Conferences. Though the single most important contribution to the financial improvement no doubt was the income generated by the new NUMEN agreement with Brill, an increase in payment of membership fees also mattered. While the number of member associations in bad standing was very high in 2005, the 2010 list showed that almost each and every member association had paid up or made arrangements to pay up, either in Toronto or before the end of 2010. A proactive dues policy, in combination with the 2005 change to the Constitution making voting rights dependent on the payment of dues, no doubt had played an important role. However, Prof. Jensen said, the improvement certainly had come about also because members realized the seriousness of situation. He expressed his gratitude to member associations that had paid their annual fees without interruption but also those who, despite financial hardship, had managed to pay up. Prof. Jensen expressed his gratitude to late Prof. Lease for his tireless efforts to keep track of dues paid and unpaid, and he thanked the Publications Officer, Prof. Brian Bocking, for his work in the negotiations with Brill. Prof. Jensen was certain that the active participation in meetings and affairs of the CIPSH, including the CIPSH journal Diogenes, together with punctual applications for grants (and a robust follow-up) had proved fruitful. The annual fee to the CIPSH and a bi-annual expense to cover part of travel costs for IAHR representatives to CIPSH meetings certainly had paid off in terms of money. Moving on to another consequence of the improved financial situation, Prof. Jensen turned his attention to the IAHR African Trust Fund. In 2009 the IAHR Executive Committee decided to use some of the money now at hand to help further the academic study of religions in Africa, and it decided to do so via the IAHR African Trust Fund. The specific measurements taken were several (cf. the written report, pp. 43-44), but the main points were these: over the next five years 8.000 USD will be transferred from the general IAHR funds to the IAHR African Trust Fund, thus bringing the amount of money in the fund up to the stipulated 20.000. At the same time, the fund will be transformed from an ‘endowment’ into a ‘sinking’ fund, and over a period of five years, beginning in 2010, it would grant 4.000 USD each year. A Board of Trustees had been set up, and the first announcement issued. Prof. Jensen thanked the associations and officers involved and extended special thanks to Prof. Afe Adogame, the AASR General Secretary, who had accepted to function as Secretary to the Board of Trustees. Finally, a special account for the IAHR Endowment Fund had been set up and the amount of money that had been donated the IAHR and earmarked this fund had been transferred from the IAHR general funds. It must be up to the incoming Executive, Prof. Jensen added, to make further arrangements regarding the IAHR Endowment Fund. Though not wanting to end his report on the significant improvements in finances on a pessimistic note, Prof. Jensen added a word of warning: the improved financial situation was not solely based on an increase in income. It was based, of course, also on a very strict policy in regard to expenses related to the performance of the work of the members of the Executive Committee, i.e. costs related to traveling to and from IAHR conferences and business meetings. But, the day when members of the Executive Committee, including the President and the General Secretary, can no longer find money within their own university or from their private accounts to finance almost all of their expenses related to the execution of their duties, might not be that far away. In that case, the IAHR Executive Committee might very well face a serious problem. According to his information the total sum of the costs covered by the officers and members of the outgoing Executive during 2005-2010 was close to 50.000 USD. The Executive thus indirectly contributed to the finances of the IAHR with no less than 10.000 USD per year. This , he added, was most certainly not particular to this Executive Committee.. Now as before, the General Secretary stressed, the IAHR Executive Committee members most certainly were not ‘swanning’ around the world, living off the dues paid by the members. 4.4. Tightening up the IAHR Academic Profile The General Secretary expressed his satisfaction with the fact that one of the first tasks completed by the Executive Committee as it took office in 2005 was to revise the IAHR policy statement (printed in the IAHR Bulletin, Toronto Congress Edition, 39, 2010, p. 4)--not least to tighten up the academic profile and thus also accommodate the expressed wish of several members, also International Committee members. The proposed amendment to Article 1 in the IAHR Constitution, Prof. Jensen continued, was meant to tighten up the Constitution accordingly, and Prof. Jensen, with reference to his written report (pp. 45-46) in which he referred to relevant statements by former General Secretaries and Presidents, saw the efforts of the Executive Committee as in perfect line with the dominant tradition within the IAHR. A tradition, however, that from time seemed to be in need of reinvigoration and reinforcement in word as well as in deed, in mission statements and in programs and practices at IAHR conferences and congresses. 4.5. Membership Development The IAHR membership, Prof. Jensen said, had developed steadily since 1950. 2005-2010 was no exception to the rule. In Tokyo 2005 the number of member associations grew to 42 (37 national and five regional ones). If the current applicant associations were adopted, the total number of member associations would be 46. However, Prof. Jensen added, account must be taken of the fact that some of the associations currently listed as members are either defunct or dormant (Belgium-Luxembourg, Cuba, Israel, and Russia), and in a few cases the membership might actually be considered lapsed. Recent contacts had given new hope that the Israeli association might be revitalized, and Prof. Jensen also expressed hope that solutions to challenges facing the Cuban and Russian associations might be found. As for Belgium-Luxembourg, however, the mail received from the Treasurer clearly indicated that that membership must be considered lapsed. Prof. Jensen and the President therefore had been in contact with a group of younger Belgian scholars trying to found a new Belgian association. Looking at the various regions of the world, Prof. Jensen noticed that membership development in Eastern and Central Europe continued. Besides what had already been indicated about Russia, he mentioned his contacts with scholars in Bulgaria, and noted the applications for membership and affiliation from Estonia, Latvia, and the International Study of Religion in Eastern and Central Europe Association. As for North America, Prof. Jensen said, the most important development of course was the application for membership from the AAR, the American Academy of Religion, the unreserved recommendation of the adoption of the AAR by the North American Association for the Study of Religion (NAASR), including the readiness of the NAASR to change status from a national to a regional member association. In regard to Africa and African associations, Prof. Jensen expressed his satisfaction about renewed contacts with representatives from the Nigerian Association for the Study of Religions (NASR) and the Eastern African Association for the Study of Religions, and he extended special thanks to Dr. Danoye Laguda from NASR, and tothe AASR Secretary, Prof. Afe Adogame for their assistance. As regards Latin and South America, Prof. Jensen thanked Prof. Michael Pye for his report regarding the ACSRM, the Asociacion de Cientistas Sociales de la Religion del Mercosur (Associacao de Cientistas Sociais da Religiao do Mercosul), located, as indicated by the name, in the countries of the Mercosur/Mercosul. Prof. Jensen had made contact with the ACSRM, and the reply from the then Secretary opened up further talks and contacts. Prof. Jensen also expressed his wish that the Brazilian association, maybe in cooperation with ALER, in the not too distant future, might host an IAHR Special or Regional Conference, and having mentioned his visit to Cuba and the ongoing efforts to find a solution to the problems facing the Cuban colleagues, Prof. Jensen expressed his hope that contacts with ALER be intensified and improved in the years ahead. Moving to South and Southeast Asia, Prof. Jensen noticed the impressive activities of the SSEASR, the positive signals in regard to payment of dues from both the Indonesian Association for the Study and Research of Religion and the Korean Association for the History of Religion, and he thanked Prof. Chae Young Kim, now KAHR Vice-President for his assistance in regard to the KAHR. 4.6. Affiliation of ‘Affiliates’ As can be seen from the IAHR Constitution, Article 3AB, Prof. Jensen said, the IAHR had for a long time operated with a distinction between, on the one hand, ‘members’, i.e. national and regional learned societies, and, on the other hand, ‘affiliates’, i.e. international associations for the study of particular areas within the history or study of religions. However, for a long time the terminology (e.g. members mostly being named ‘affiliates’) as well as the actual state of affairs had not reflected what must have been the intention of the Constitution, namely to differentiate between and incorporate both member societies and affiliates. The Executive Committee had agreed to try to implement the wording of the Constitution, and Prof. Jensen expressed his great satisfaction that the IAHR had received applications for affiliation from no less than four potential affiliates (cf. item 9). The Executive Committee was certain that the affiliation of these and similar learned societies would prove beneficial to the IAHR as well as to the associations in question. Contacts with Prof. James Lewis, President of the recently established International Society for the Study of New Religions (ISSNR), as well as contacts with Executive Director, Kent Richards, and then President, Prof. J. Z. Smith, of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) regarding possible ways of cooperation or affiliation so far had not lead to anything more concrete. Finally, Prof. Jensen mentioned that he had received a few requests for individual membership. In all but one case, the one of an Australian scholar, the scholar in question had, in accordance with the IAHR Constitution Article 3B, been asked to seek membership with an already existing national or regional association. 4.7. The IAHR Website and Women Scholars Network The IAHR website, Prof. Jensen said, serves as one of the most important means of communications to the IAHR membership. Consequently, it has to be continuously updated in order to allow for the optimal use of new technologies and web facilities. Prof. Francisco Diez de Velasco, the first elected Internet Officer in the history of the IAHR, had been well aware of this, yet recommended that the IAHR use a professional to redesign and update the website. Jeremy B. Hughes, a webmaster at the University of Tennessee, who worked with Prof. Hackett, had agreed to serve in this capacity, and for a very reasonable fee. It was the hope of the Executive Committee that the use of new facilities, e.g. of ‘folders’ restricted to members and web versions of publications, would make communication with members not just less expensive but also more effective. The major challenge however remained: how to make sure that communication reaches the individual members of the member associations. For this to happen, Prof Jensen said, he still had to rely on the officers of the member associations. It is so far only the officers who can reach the individual members by way of forwarding communication from the IAHR. The IAHR Executive Committee does not have lists of the individual members of the member associations. Prof. Jensen took the opportunity to thank Prof. Diez de Velasco for his work as Internet Officer. It had been a pleasure to work with Prof. Diez de Velasco. The IAHR Women Scholars Network (cf. http://www.iahr.dk/wsn/) launched in 2007 aims at providing “a forum for women in Religious Studies throughout the world to be in contact with one another”. Prof. Jensen extended thanks to everybody involved in setting up and maintaining the network, and he added that the Executive Committee had discussed an idea of also establishing a Young Scholars Network. 4.8. IAHR Publications Agreements between Brill and IAHR on Numen Book Series (NBS) and Science of Religion: Abstracts and Index of Recent Articles (SoR) came to an end in 2008 at the same time as the IAHR Executive signed a new contract with Brill on NUMEN. The outgoing Executive Committee, Prof. Jensen added, would however hand over to the incoming Executive a proposal for an IAHR book series. Prof. Jensen once again mentioned that Proceedings from the World Congresses in Durban 2000 and Tokyo 2005 had been published, and he directed the attention of the members to the IAHR website at http://www.iahr.dk/proceedings.html He also reminded everybody planning publications, including thematic issues of journals, linked to the IAHR World Congress as well as to past or upcoming IAHR Special and Regional Conferences, that such publications must acknowledge that they stem from an IAHR Congress or conference, and that a minimum of three (copies) must be made available to the Executive Committee of all Spin-Off volumes. The General Secretary ended his oral report giving thanks to Vice-Presidents Profs. Gerrie ter Haar and Akio Tsukimoto, to Internet Officer Prof. Francisco Diez de Velasco, and to member without portfolio Prof. Alef T. Wasim for their many years of service to the IAHR. Thanks were also extended to the member associations hosting the Toronto World Congress, to Congress Director, Prof. Donald Wiebe, to the Congress Secretariat, to the Academic Program Co-Chairs, Profs. Ingvild S. Gilhus and Luther H. Martin, and to everybody else in Toronto and around the world for their contribution to the Congress. The President, Prof. Hackett, opened the floor for questions and comments, to the oral as well as written report. Several members wanted to comment on the report on membership development and a few wanted to ask about publications: Prof. Benavides commented on the situation in Latin and South America. He agreed with the General Secretary that there was a need for better contact and communication with and within that region, and he also agreed with several of the points made by Prof. Pye (points referred to in the General Secretary’s written report, pp. 46-47). Prof. Casadio offered suggestions about whom to contact in Belgium. Prof. Jensen thanked him and provided the information that he actually was in contact with the mentioned colleagues. Prof. Pasi mentioned the risk that a Belgian association might face a problem of a Flemish/French division. Prof. Hackett though, allayed such fears, saying that the intention of the scholars engaged in the establishment of a new association intended it to be a national association encompassing both French and Flemish speaking scholars. Prof. Cox who had recently spent a longer period of time in Australia said that it was his impression that the possibility of the Australian association reentering the IAHR was something that the Australians would discuss in the not too distant future. In regard to the Russian association, Prof. Fylypovych provided the information that co-operations between Ukrainian and Russian scholars about regional studies were in existence. Upon a question from the General Secretary as to whether an East–Asian association had been established, Prof. Shimazono answered that it had not but that negotiations were ongoing. Prof. Shimazono promised to keep the General Secretary informed about this. In regard to the report on publications, especially the Proceedings from Durban and Tokyo, Prof. Casadio asked why no hard copies were for sale? The Publications Officer, Prof. Bocking answered that hard copies were for libraries, electronic publications for everybody else. To publish and send out hard copies unfortunately was much too expensive. Prof. Pasi offered suggestions for downloading and for making hard copies, and Prof. Jensen promised to pass the comments on to the incoming Executive Committee. Prof. Hackett then thanked Prof. Jensen for his report and proposed that it be formally adopted. The report was adopted with applause. 5. Report by the Acting Treasurer Acting Treasurer, Prof. Jensen, having already reported on the improved financial situation, asked the members of the International Committee to look at the Acting Treasurers Report, IAHR Bulletin, Toronto Congress Edition, 39, 2010, pp. 55-59. Prof. Jensen added a few comments to a few of the items listed, and then asked if there were questions or comments. Since this was not the case, the President, Prof. Hackett, thanked Prof. Jensen for taking upon himself the work also of Acting Treasurer and for his report, and she proposed that the report be formally adopted. The report was adopted with applause. 6. Additional matters of report by the Executive Committee The President, Prof. Hackett, asked the General Secretary if there was any additional matter of report. Prof. Jensen informed the International Committee that there was no additional matter to report. 7. Recommendation of changes to the IAHR Constitution and Rules of Procedure The President, Prof. Hackett, asked the General Secretary to suggest a procedure for the deliberations related to the item. Prof. Jensen initially stated that while the “Constitution may be modified only by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the International Committee” (Article 8), Rules of Procedure may be “amended and/or suspended by the International Committee on recommendation of the Executive Committee, except where they reproduce provisions of the Constitution […], by a decision taken by a simple majority of the members present and voting.” (Rule 22). Prof. Jensen related that he had sent an email to all officers and to the Executive Committee (and to applicant societies too) on June 21, 2010. Attached were several documents related to this item: 1) proposals (and the rationale for those proposals) from the Executive Committee for amendments to the IAHR Constitution and By-Laws, 2) a document with a separate proposal from the African Association for the Study of Religions (AASR) regarding a restructuring of the IAHR Executive Committee and an amendment to the IAHR Constitution Article 4c. In the same email Prof. Jensen had inserted a link to a restricted area on the IAHR website as well as the password to enter that area where the documents for use at this meeting, especially the mentioned documents related to amendments, were also uploaded. Prof. Jensen continued suggesting that the floor be given first to Prof. Jan G. Platvoet, one of the two signatories to the AASR proposal, in order for Prof. Platvoet to present the proposal. The AASR proposal for changes to Article 4c (the AASR, p. 9 in the proposal, recommend that the Executive is constituted by “a President and two Vice Presidents; a General Secretary and two Deputy General Secretaries; a Treasurer and two Deputy Treasurers; and a Communications Unit consisting of a Publications Officer, an Internet Officer and a Webmaster. It is organised in four functional triads: the Presidency, the Secretariat, the Treasury and the Communications Unit”) just like the proposal from the Executive Committee regarding the same article, could not, if recommended by the Executive and International Committees and later adopted by the General Assembly, be given effect until the invitation for nominations to the next Executive Committee starting in 2015. The election of Executive Committee officers for the period 2010-2015 must run its course in accordance with the current Constitution and Rules. The nominees for election 2010 and for the Executive Committee 2010-2015 had all been nominated and all accepted nomination in accordance with the current Constitution and delegation of duties for the officers and members-at-large of the Executive Committee. For this same reason, the suggestion by the AASR (p. 9 in the proposal) that an alternative to a change of the current Constitution Article 4c might be “that the changes proposed are adopted for a trial period of five years, are reviewed in 2015, and if found to be helpful are given a constitutional basis in 2015”, likewise could not be effectuated in the form proposed. There was no provision within the Constitution for setting aside for up to five years a major clause or clauses within the same Constitution. Indeed, Prof. Jensen added, it would undermine the very idea of a Constitution to introduce such a provision. The Constitution and the Rules for Nomination Procedure for the Executive Committee of the IAHR might of course be changed by decision of the General Assembly (and the Executive Committee proposes several changes), but changes in regard to the composition, nomination and election of the Executive Committee could not be given effect until the next nominations process in 2015. Following the clarification of procedure and timetable, Prof. Hackett gave the floor to Prof. Platvoet. Prof. Platvoet, referring to the detailed proposal, gave a brief summary of the key points of the AASR proposal for restructuring the IAHR Executive into four functional triads: Presidency, Secretariat, Treasury, and Communications Unit, a restructuring aiming, inter alia, at actively involving all members of the Executive in the work of the Executive and thus in the government of the IAHR. Having thanked Prof. Platvoet and the AASR for the proposal and the presentation, Prof. Hackett opened the floor for discussion of this proposal. Prof. Cox asked if the proposed ’secretariat’ would not be in need of funding in order to function. Prof. Platvoet replied that the proposal was based on the possibility of the use of electronic communication between center and periphery. Prof. Gilhus said that the proposal had interesting ideas, but that it was not very practical – and she did not think that to rely on electronic communication with such a heavy structure was to be recommended. Prof. Bochinger made the suggestion that the proposal should be discussed in a small committee with former general secretaries. Prof. Pye stressed that the proposal touched upon important concerns, but added that the IAHR was not that Eurocentric anymore and that each Executive Committee had so far found its own way. Cooperation, he said, depended on the persons involved. He saw it as valuable to hand over the proposal to the incoming Executive Committee for inspiration, but he did not recommend the setting up of a whole new organizational structure and he recommended to drop the part of the proposal that pertained to such changes to the Constitution. Prof. Wiebe said that the proposal was a recipe for disaster and would make the organizational structure heavier than that pertaining to the President of the US. If you take the periphery into the center, he said, then you take the center into the periphery and it becomes difficult to see what is in the center. Prof. Bocking said that the proposal complicated the structure of the organization too much, but that its ideas could be used as an inspiration. Prof. Pasi thought it wise to use the proposal as an inspiration for a definition of the functions of officers and members of the Executive Committee. Prof. Brodeur suggested that the proposal was handed over to the incoming Executive Committee to be used it as a basis for further reflections. Prof. Jensen, referring to the preliminary response (in the mentioned rationale for amendments), as well as to related discussions at the most recent meeting in the Executive, said that the outgoing Executive Committee was grateful to the AASR and to Profs. G. ter Haar and J.G. Platvoet for their engagement in the IAHR and that the proposal was a welcome contribution to the historiography of the IAHR Executive Committee since 1950. It also ought to serve as food for further thought, and Prof. Jensen said that it might be an inspiration for the incoming Executive Committee in its discussions about the functions of the officers and the members-at-large. Prof. Brodeur, seconded by B. Bocking, then formally proposed that the proposal from the AASR be referred to the incoming Executive Committee and that the Executive Committee be asked to report on its related discussions on the next International Committee Meeting. This proposal was unanimously adopted. The International Committee then turned to the proposals from the Executive Committee for amendments to the Constitution and By-Laws. A Power Point presentation with the proposals assisted the International Committee: each slide displayed two rows, the one to the left showed the current text (with a strikethrough of text to be amended), the one to the right the proposed amended text (with amendments displayed in red). Prof. Jensen accompanied each slide with comments on the rationale for the proposals, and mention thus was made in due time of the wish to tighten up the academic profile of the IAHR, to allow for the vocabulary to better reflect names and realities amongst the members, to clarify and specify the existing distinction between constituent member societies and affiliates, to clarify and specify the text on the position of provisional members and affiliates, to incorporate procedures in regard to fees and lapsed membership, and to codify the meeting of the International Committee in between two quinquennial congresses. As for the Rules, mention was made of the wish to increase the number of possible nominations of Honorary Life Members during a five year term, and of the wish to add another two members to the Nominating Committee, in order, inter alia, to better meet the demands of the global character of the IAHR. In light of the proposal from the AASR and the discussion that had followed it, Prof. Jensen took a little more time to explain the rationale for the proposal regarding the composition of the Executive Committee (Article 4c), i.e. the proposal not to have a designated Internet Officer and Membership Secretary but instead have, as in the period before 2005, four members-at-large. The proposal, Prof. Jensen said, partly reflected his evaluation of the new delegation of duties that came into effect in 2005. During his now five years of daily work as General Secretary, he had had a wonderful and fine cooperation with the current Internet Officer and Membership Secretary, and they have both done an excellent job. Consequently, the proposal had, Prof. Jensen stressed, absolutely nothing to do with the current two officers and their work. As regards the website, the matter was that the technicalities and skills involved in maintaining and developing a website were demanding, and the Executive Committee deemed that the advantages of having a professional webmaster rather than a colleague with some interest in such matters would outweigh potential disadvantages. It was also the opinion of the Executive Committee that it might prove hard to find a colleague willing to undertake the job as Internet Officer. As for the Membership Secretary, Prof. Jensen said that it had been helpful to have somebody who could assist him updating the list of officers and e-mail addresses. Nevertheless, at the end of the day, it was the General Secretary who was responsible not just for the website but also for mailing lists and addresses. It was, furthermore, the General Secretary who would send out the letters, e-Bulletins etc. and thus the General Secretary who was the one in need of updated lists. Besides: the General Secretary and the Membership Secretary had too often found themselves doing the same job, twice or even thrice, sometimes thus making things not simpler but more complicated. As much as the General Secretary might need to be relieved of some of his tasks and work, Prof. Jensen said, the new delegation of these two specific duties had not proven to be the right way. If the General Secretary should be relieved and the daily smooth functioning of the IAHR improved, then the General Secretary ought to have, as was the case, for instance, of former General Secretary Bleeker, his or her personal secretary. As for the coming five-year term, Prof. Jensen added, irrespective of the voting on the proposals, there will still be an elected Internet Officer and Membership Secretary. It would therefore be necessary not just for future Executives but also for the 2010-2015 Executive to discuss how to make the optimal use of all the elected officers and members. The International Committee voted by a show of hands on each of the proposed amendments as these were shown in the mentioned Power Point presentation. The International Committee, with the one exception mentioned below, by an overwhelming majority of show of hands recommended all the proposed amendments to the Constitution and adopted all the proposed amendments to the Rules of Procedure, the rules regarding Nomination Procedure for the Executive Committee, and the rules regarding Proposals for Honorary Life Membership included. In regard to the proposal regarding the composition of the Executive Committee and thus the Constitution Article 4 (and all Rules reproducing this article), the International Committee had a brief discussion: Prof. Platvoet said that if this proposal was accepted as it was now, the AASR proposal could not be implemented until 2020. Prof. Jensen stressed that in the past five-year term, the rule was that each and everybody in the Executive Committee was participating and ’put’ to work. The outgoing Executive Committee had worked as an integrated whole, in and between meetings, and no doubt the proposed ’members without portfolio’ would have tasks to perform. Prof. Pye pointed out that an Internet Officer and webmaster need not be same, and that there might be important tasks for an elected Internet Officer to perform even if the Executive Committee also made use of an external webmaster. Prof. Lochan was not happy with the designation ’members without portfolio’ and he also proposed that ’General Secretary’ be changed into (or back into) ’Secretary General’. Prof. Pye proposed that “four members without portfolio” be changed to “four further members”. His motion was seconded and then passed unanimously. The proposal to change ’General Secretary’ to ’Secretary General’ was voted down. The President could conclude that – with the mentioned small change from ’four members without portfolio’ to ’four further members’ - all proposals as regarded the Constitution and the By-Laws had been recommended and adopted by the International Committee. 8. Election of the new Executive Committee With reference to previous information sent to all officers in the IAHR e-Bulletin Supplement November 2009 (http://www.iahr.dk/newsletter/nominations.html) as well as to the IAHR Bulletin Toronto Congress Edition, 39, 2010, p. 63, Prof. Jensen explained that the Nominating Committee, composed of Profs. Giulia S. Gasparro, Jan G. Platvoet, and Armin W. Geertz, in a letter dated October 20, 2009 had submitted its nominations. The candidates nominated by the committee were the following:
Several of the candidates were present. Prof. Jensen extended greetings to the International Committee from the candidates who, for various reasons, were prevented from participating. Prof. Jensen also referred to the statements of candidacy in the IAHR Bulletin, Toronto Congress Edition, 39, 2010, pp. 64-70. Prof. Casadio asked if the fact that the Russian association had not paid its fees ought to have consequences with regard to the candidacy of Prof. Shakhnovich. Prof. Jensen said that the members of the Executive Committee, contrary to the (other) members of the International Committee, do not represent ’their’ national or regional associations. They shall, according to the Constitution, Article 4, ” be chosen in such a way as reasonably to reflect various parts of the world where the academic study of religion is pursued in its various disciplines.” The Nominating Committee, according to the relevant rules, should also strive towards a gender balance among the nominees. Prof. Jensen continued, saying that according to the Constitution Article 4c “[m]embers of the International Committee may propose alternative nominations not less than one month prior to each international congress. The International Committee at its meeting just preceding the General Assembly, shall elect the Executive Committee and shall report this to the General Assembly." When informing about the candidates nominated by the Nominating Committee, Prof. Jensen had asked the member associations and societies that wanted to propose alternative nominations to do so no later than July 14, 2010. Prof. Jensen informed the International Committee that he had received no alternative nominations, that the candidates mentioned (and listed on a Power Point slide) were thus the only candidates, and that, according to Rule 16g, those candidates “hose candidacy is unopposed shall be declared ‘elected unopposed’“. The International Committee, with applause, declared the named candidates elected. Prof. Jensen thanked the named members of the Nominating Committee for their work and service to the IAHR. The President, Prof. Hackett, warmly welcomed the new members to the Executive Committee. 9. Recommendation of new members and affiliates The General Secretary, Prof. Jensen, displaying the names of the applicants on a Power Point slide, informed the International Committee that he had received applications for membership from the following associations/societies:
The ESSR had applied for IAHR membership in an e-mail dated July 26, 2006, the Prof. Jensen informed that the International Committee in Brno 2008, following a recommendation of the Executive Committee, had already recommended that the EESR and the APER be adopted members by the General Assembly. He continued saying that the Executive Committee recommended the adoption of the AAR as well as that of the LRPB, and that it was now up to the International Committee to decide whether to recommend the adoption of the AAR and the LRPB to the General Assembly. With regard to the AAR some of the members of the International Committee asked a few questions and others contributed with a few comments. Prof. Schmidt asked what would be the answer from the AAR to a question whether they would comply with the IAHR Constitution and change their own. Prof. Zbiral likewise asked about the AAR with regard to their constitution and that of the IAHR. AAR Executive Director, J. Fitzmier, responded that the AAR would adhere to the IAHR Constitution but that the AAR had not thought of changing its own constitution for that reason. Prof. Wiebe remarked that other IAHR member associations had constitutions similar to that of the AAR. Prof. Bocking said that the AAR, just like other member associations, has to comply with the IAHR Constitution. Prof. Pye said that the application from the AAR was indeed remarkable and that the situation was historical: he had no doubt that the IAHR should welcome the AAR. Prof. Casadio said that he would have voted against a recommendation of the AAR as a member in 2008 in Brno. Now, however, he would vote for it. In regard to the question about the status of the NAASR if the AAR become a member to the IAHR, Prof. Braun confirmed that the NAASR would turn into a North American regional association. Prof. Gonzales added that NAASR also covers or includes Mexico. Following this discussion, the International Committee with an overwhelming majority show of hands, and with applause, recommended the adoption of the AAR. The International Committee likewise and with applause recommended the adoption of the LRPB. Prof. Jensen, displaying the names of the applicants on a Power Point slide, informed the International Committee that he had received applications for affiliation from the following:
The IACSR applied for affiliation in an e-mail dated October 7, 2007, the ISSRNC did so in e-mail as of December 12, 2009, the ISORECEA in e-mail as of May 5, 2010, and the ESSWE in e-mail as of June 29, 2010. All applicants had sent their statutes and a list of officers along with the applications. Prof. Jensen asked the representatives from the applicant associations to stand up. The International Committee unanimously and with applause recommended the adoption of the ISSRNC, the ISORECEA, and the ESSWE as affiliates to the IAHR. Prof. Jensen, displaying the name of the applicant, Prof. Helen Farley, University of Queensland, on a Power Point slide, informed the International Committee that he had received one more application for affiliation to the IAHR, namely from the named Australian scholar. The Executive Committee, Prof. Jensen added, recommended the adoption of this individual due to the fact that the Australian association at the moment is not a member to the IAHR. The International unanimously and with applause recommended the adoption of Prof. Farley as an affiliate individual member to the IAHR. 10. Recommendation of Honorary Life Members Prof. Jensen, having informed about the procedure for the recommendation and conferment of IAHR Honorary Life Membership, stated that the Honorary Life Membership Advisory Committee, appointed by the International Committee in Brno 2008, consisting of the three Honorary Life Members Profs. Yolotl Gonzales, Peter Antes and Michael Pye had submitted a letter of recommendation to the end that Honorary Life Membership be conferred on the following five persons all of whom had, in accordance with the related IAHR rules, “distinguished themselves through life-long service to the history of religions through their scholarship, regular participation in IAHR conferences, service as national or international officers, and/or other outstanding contributions”:
The International Committee accompanied and endorsed the recommendation of each of the mentioned scholars with applause. Prof. Jensen congratulated the named new Honorary Life Members and thanked the named members of the Honorary Life Membership Advisory Committee for their work and service to the IAHR. 11. Future IAHR Conferences 12. Any other business (Minutes prepared by General Secretary, Tim Jensen, with the assistance of Ingvild S. Gilhus as regards comments and questions to various items)
|
Copyright © 2009 International Association for the History of Religions (IAHR)
|