Sandum Motion for Bradley of Dullahan’s Removal Fails

For six minutes, the Sôgmô addressed the Quorum of the GUM over the controversial topic of removing Bradley of Dullahan from the Grand Unified Micronational’s list of Official Diplomatic Staff. The topic, which became so divisive that non-member-state Wyvern became involved and authored a statement against the Sandum motion, was truly divisive. Voting halted half-way through the voting session as delegates considered the motion.

The Sôgmô addressed the Quorum for six minutes and began chronologically from when M. Dullahan was readded to the GUM’s Official Diplomatic Staff – simplified to ancillary staff for brevity – for the first time about a month and a half ago. “He was quickly removed from that position with popular support of this representative institution. M. Dullahan had, at that time, made comments unnecessarily harsh on topics of race — controversial topics which continue to inflame the passions of many people today, ” the Sôgmô explained in his speech.

The Sôgmô placed emphasis not on the qualities and views of M. Dullahan, who argues that he is notracist, but on the facts of arguments he has made which depict discrimination and bigotry, “whether M. Dullahan is racist is debatable, but these arguments are a few which many members were offended by some time ago and, I would argue, that nothing changes that view [the past offence of M. Dullahan] to this day.”

The Sôgmô then argued that these racial comments, made then and now, of M. Dullahan were made under the speculative public eye of the intermicronational community to be ardently opposed to racism. “As members of this organisation, we are within our own public eye. We too have an international scope of responsibilities and political ethics as [do] members of the UN or NAM organisations. It is unbefitting for our organisation to willingly accept back an individual who makes intolerable arguments about any race’s supremacy, in no matter what field, because the days of race science are finished.”

Juclandian King Ciprian I, who had been protesting the re-admittance of M. Dullahan back into the GUM, was urged to return for this Quorum by the Sôgmô. The Sôgmô finally argued that member-states take legitimate and lawful supremacy over individual Official Diplomatic Staff. “Since M. Dullahan’s return, the Juclandian King – who has returned upon my personal request and advice – has protested M. Dullahan’s return. If the senior delegate of a dignified member-state’s delegation is so unprepared to maintain its seat in this organisation because of such a controversial staff-member, I would rightfully argue that that serves to put Official Diplomatic Staff over the delegates of member-states.”

The Sôgmô then presented his draft motion to the GUM Quorum, noting it as “liberal” reform for the Official Diplomatic Staff:

I motion that this Quorum reaffirms the principle that Chairs removed by the representative institutions of this organisation no longer deserve the privelege of Official Diplomatic Staff status; that this Quorum removes Mssrs. Bradley of Dullahan and Robert Lethler from this organisation’s Official Diplomatic Staff; that the Official Diplomatic Staff, whose purpose is to advise the Chair, serves at the prerogative of the Chair; and, that this Quorum invites King Ciprian of Juclandia to return in full to its chambers as delegate of his Kingdom.

Discussion on the topic was in turn dominated by the Sôgmô and the Juclandian King, who noted M. Dullahan’s past racist and religious discriminatory statements and comments.

However, the overwhelming sentiments of half a week against the State of Sandus’ clear and public motion for the removal of M. Dullahan from the GUM won out when it came to voting. A two-minute break marks the point in which those fervent about the topic voted and those considering both sides voted. This break depicts that many delegations were aware of the overwhelming evidence depicting M. Dullahan’s improper behaviour as Official Diplomatic Staff but were persuaded by the emotions of M. Dullahan and his overreaching aura of support that has served to demonise the State and oppose the motion. This clear division is exemplified by one delegation’s change of vote twice, from Abstain to Support and then back to Abstain, in an institution where it is against convention to change votes even once.

The Sôgmô and the Juclandian King then summarily promoted junior delegates to positions of senior delegates as both left in protest of the Quorum’s support for M. Dullahan. “M. Sammut assumes my role as senior delegate of the State of Sandus for the time being,” the Sôgmô said before leaving the Quorum chamber. Both the Juclandian King and the Sandum Sôgmô have expressed intents to step down from the Security Council, citing the Council’s “inactivity and inability to protect the Grand Unified Micronational as a whole from controversial and hateful comments by a member of this organisation’s staff” (Sôgmô). The Sôgmô explained in a short speech in the Security Council chamber:

The State of Sandus views this Council as being especially vital in the defence of member-states from racial and religious bigotry. Due to this Council’s inactivity and inability to protect the Grand Unified Micronational as a whole from controversial and hateful comments by a member of this organisation’s staff, the State of Sandus’s delegation to this organisation shall meet in full and decide whether or not the State shall leave this Council and pursue its own progressive form of security.

The State of Sandus’s dedication both to the GUM and to anti-Racism remain strong after this motion.

*Due to GUM convention, only a delegation may make their statements public and the entire minutes of the GUM Quorum is restricted to the member-states and the observers. As a result, this article contains only the exact words of the Sandum delegate to the GUM, the Sôgmô, and quotes no other delegation’s words. This article has been made in full compliance with these restrictions and upon the advice of the Supreme Judge of the GUM.