Policies and Rules
Governing the Conduct of
The Policies and Rules Governing the Conduct of Hearings
(Appendix 5 to the ASIEs), was written in 1980 and modified in 1985.
The Rules then remained unchanged and largely unused until late 2002,
when the AMC decided they needed improvement. The list of revisions
to the Rules is an excellent example of an organization's tinkering
with its rules to try to achieve some desired result rather than writing
broad rules or guidelines that would allow for a variety of acceptable
Amended March 16, 2002
Amended March 29, 2003
Amended March 20, 2004
Amended December 4, 2004
Amended March 19, 2005
All versions are presented here so that you can see the
progression of the changes.
Rules prior to 2002
Rules as of December, 2002
Rules as of July 5, 2003
Rules as of March, 2004
Rule 7(B) was added 3/20/04 to permit the Respondent to waive a hearing
before the H.C. and instead use a single arbitrator selected by the
American Arbitration Committee.
Rule 10 as modified 3/29/03 prohibits the Respondent from having
a verbatim record of the hearing.
Rule 12 as modified 3/20/04 states that, when an arbitrator is used,
the arbitrator's finding of fact is final, and if an act inimical
has been found, H.C. only determines sanction. Removes requirements
for contents of written decision. Provides for different treatment
of finding of fact between arbitrator and H.C. If H.C. was finder
of fact, AMC may vote whether to accept findings; if arbitrator was
finder of fact, AMC is obligated to accept the findings without question.
Rules as of March, 2005
Missing ASIE's and indexing errors in the ASIE's make it impossible
to track down individual changes to the Rules. I have not compared
the Rules as of March 2004 with the current version in detail; however, one
clear change is that the use of an arbitrator has been eliminated
and various sections of the Rules modified to account for that change.
|"These [witch]hunts ...could not have happened unless a major
legal change had taken place: the adoption by secular courts of
inquisitional procedures. Secret sessions, withholding of the source
of charges, denial of counsel, acceptance of evidence from prejudiced
sources, lack of cross-examination, passing of indeterminate sentences,
assumption of guiltall these were justified to protect the
church from heretics and society from witches."
Witchcraze : New History of the European Witch Hunts,
by Anne L. Barstow