Draft of Minutes of the last part of the Congress

Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2002 16:43
Real name: Alexander Presman
Location: the Netherlands

Draft of Minutes of the last part of the Congress

Post by A.Presman » Tue May 20, 2003 23:18

I wasn't present during the first parts of General Assembly.
So I have no Minutes of it. I hope that Mr. Devroe will provide it as quick as possible to make a picture completer.
There is no doubt that a lot of work is necessary to get the unity back, situation is very polarised.

Minutes of the General Assembly (last part)
Zwartsluis, 18 May 2003.

A. Yatsenko – Ukraine
R. Klimashov – Russia (RDF)
I. Fridman – Israel
L. Marcos – Brazil
E. Bat Erdene – Mongolia
G. Valneris – Latvia
I. Pashkevich – Belarus
F. Verbouk – Australia
E. Buzhinski – Lithiania
L. Lesakovski – Poland
J. Zioltovski – Germany
Also present: Y. Chertok (Russia, RIDF), A.Chizhov, T. Tansykkuzhina, A.Presman, H.Wiersma, R.Zdoroviak, A.Gantvarg, R.Clerc, I.Koyfman, I. Shovkoplias, A.Lehman, A. Andall

I.Koyfman opened the meeting and asked that one person should be appointed to be the Chairman of the meeting. L.Markos (Brazil) suggested Vice-President FMJD Mr. A. Yatsenko (Ukraine) to be the chairman. No other candidatures were suggested and the candidature of Mr. Yatsenko has been approved. Mr. Yatsenko asked Mr. I. Koyfman to be Secretary of the meeting.
Mr. Yatsenko informed that the meeting will be held in two languages – English and Russian.
Yatsenko: The reason of this continuing is that the opinion showed in the letter of 11 federation has still been ignored.
From the beginning of the Sunday’s meeting nobody (also Mr. Van Beek) disagreed with the facts mentioned in the letter. Still there were no steps done to improve the situation.
Wiersma: I don’t feel me member of the CD handling by the tricky way.
Yatsenko: In the morning session the question of Belarus and Senegal was put into fire of discussion. Than the break has been taken with the promise to have voting after that. After the break there was still no voting. Mr. Van Beek addressed to the delegates that the GA should be broken and go on in two months. And that he is not more candidate for the President. KNDB (Mr. Van den Hoek) supported this suggestion. But when he was asked what are obligation of the KNDB to organise it – are there financial guaranties, guaranty of the obtaining of visas by the delegated – he said that it is not possible to give an answer.
Bat Erdene: We can’t come to the GA every time again.
Yatsenko: Than it was the voting, but when the quantity of bulletins has been counted there were not 36 but 38 bulletins found. So the list of countries was infringed. Again the falsification. Van den Hoek though defended it. Wales was again treated as voting country. Mr. Devroe explained that they use the same list that yesterday. Mr. Wiersma as the counting commission declared voting illegal. Votes were not counted. Than Mr. Devroe said that we shouldn’t continue and should stop. But the majority wouldn’t like to stop, but just fix that there was the mistake or falsification and continue the work. Still the meeting was closed by Mr. Van Beek. Therefore we have to go on.
Question of Russia. It is necessary to define who can and who can’t vote.
Klimashev: I’m for the dialogue.
Markos: asked Mr. Chertok to do not participate in the President’s elections to avoid that we start with the problem of Russian federations. This problem is to be discussed at the later stage.
Chertok is agree.
Wiersma : the commission for the Russian problem has to be created. Koyfman – it is the first question after President’s elections.
Ziotkovski – Germany is new federation and is not ready to make a choice and would like to keep neutrality.
Question of Belarus and Senegal. Belarus received too late invoice of Treasurer. Payment guarantied by the letter of sport authorities. Senegal – on Saturday it was said that there are guaranties of payment of Senegal. Today already not.
Voting : Do Belarus may to participate in the voting? Yes-10 Against-0
Voting : Do Senegal may to participate in the voting? Yes-0 Against-10

President elections: Mr. Van Beek resigned. Mr. Shovkoplias keeps his candidature for the President.
Buzhinski: Can we still agree with the candidature of Mr. Shovkoplias and will not later on appear that his candidature was suggested less than 2 weeks before GA. Yatsenko: Candidature of van Beek also wasn’t presented before the CD.
Bat Erdene: Statutes mention that 2 weeks is preferred by not obligatory.
Voting – to accept candidature of I.Shovkoplias for the President of the FMJD. 9 for , abstained Germany, Lithiania.
Voting : Candidature I. Shovkoplias, bulletins Yes, No. Counting commission – Gantvarg, Wiersma, Tansykkuzhina.
Result of the voting: Yes: 8, No: 0, Blanco: 3
Germany excused have to leave.
I. Shovkoplias thanked for the trust and promised from the beginning to concentrate on three points – recognition by the IOC, creating and filling the fund, preparation of the GA.
Mr. Shovkoplias suggested for the 1st Vice-President Mr. H.Wiersma. Candidature supported by Russian draughts federation. Due to the fact that this function doesn’t exist in the actual Statutes – one of the changes in the Statutes should be establishing of this function. Actually it will be ad-interim 1st Vice-President.
Mr. Wiersma should try to organise the smooth transmission of the activities from the old to the new Board.
For the other function temporarily named ad-interim:
General Secretary: I. Koyfman
Tournament Director: A. Leman
Treasury: to be temporarily covered by H. Wiersma

Commission for the problem of Russian federation.
Mr. Klimashev suggested to organise commission from H. Wiersma, C. Bat Erdene and A. Presman to try to find the solution. Commission will begin the work immediately after end of the meeting together with representatives of both federations.

A.Gantwarg: Work of the Managing Board in the past period is failed. It is necessary to make a control of the financial activities of the FMJD.
R.Klimashev: Would like to find peaceful solution of the problem in Russia. Big respect to Great Russian players. He would agree that RIDF would be a provisional member of the FMJD for section 100.
Last edited by A.Presman on Thu May 22, 2003 22:41, edited 4 times in total.

Jacques PERMAL
Posts: 3384
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 09:15

Thanks ! but what about Russia ?

Post by Jacques PERMAL » Tue May 20, 2003 23:50

Thanks to A. Presman for this report of GA.

Could A. Presman explain us the exact problem of Russia ?

Best regards.
Information : my first priority !!

L'info en première ligne !!

Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2002 16:43
Real name: Alexander Presman
Location: the Netherlands

Post by A.Presman » Wed May 21, 2003 00:03

The problem of Russia is that there are actually two federations in Russia.
One is lead by Mr. Klimashev. And the new one for 100 only where all best players in 100 squares game joined (Chizhov, Georgiev, Tansykkuzhina).
Two federation couldn find so far the way for dialogue and joining.
That creates for the FMJD big problem.
Russia is too important country and good order there is important for the order in the draughst world.

Well, immediately after the meeting the dialogue has begun. And there is some move up. Still I feel that the reserve of mutual distrust is very high and it will need a lot of patience and work to solve this problem.

Georges Hübner

Difficult situation

Post by Georges Hübner » Wed May 21, 2003 18:33

Although I have recently retired from the FMJD board (I was secretary until last october), I am still interested in what happens to the FMJD.

As I see, the situation is very confusing, with a complete replacement of the old board. I sincerely regret that there was no way to find a smooth transition. However, as I am not fully informed anymore, I do not want to take sides at this point.

I would just like to give some pieces of advice for the future:
- 100 and 64 squares coexist, but they are different. The FMJD has to unite them all. The whole essence of the 'Russian problem' is related to the difficult coexistence of the two. So please, try to find a modus operandi that respects the specificities of both games.
- One of the reasons for the current situation is the (everlasting) bad financial situation of the FMJD. It is crucial that the bases of functioning are solid, and enable the FMJD to live permanently with a proper standard. This is of utmost importance to the GAISF and IOC.
- Do not destroy the few good things that have been built. The way the current board has been replaced may hide that all these people have done their best, benevolently, for the sake of draughts. Their style and achievements may not please everyone, but they should at least be owed some respect for the time they have been devoted simply because they love the sports. I have a particular thought for Rik Devroe, who replaced me and was caught in this storm without being really prepared. I feel sorry for that, and Rik has all my sympathy.
- Remember that some national federations are more supportive to the FMJD than others. Without their support, nothing is possible and our sports will simply explode. Implode would even be a more proper term. Regardless of who is in charge, this is what must be absolutely avoided.
- The statutes are important. Respect them, in every circumstance. If they don't fit anymore, change them with and Extraordinary General Assembly. If there is a doubt, read them twice.

I hope that the situation is going to cool down, and everyone will recover cold blood again.

Georges Hübner, Ph.D.
Gen. Secr. 1999-2002

Georges Hübner

More precise picture

Post by Georges Hübner » Thu May 22, 2003 10:21

It seems that we have very incomplete public information at this point in time.

As I understand it, the minutes that are on the forum represent only one part of the puzzle, as the minutes of the GA are not yet available.

I wonder about what happened exactly to the official board of the FMJD. Did it resign ? I have read that Wouter van Beek was actually proposing to resign, definitely, in two months. Even if there is a polarization on the role and person of the president, I don't see anything that would disable the board of the FMJD.

Two remarks:
- the situation is becoming so confusing that a mediator, whose independence would be beyond any suspicion, should be nominated. In the meantime, it looks like the current board is still in charge (unless specified in the minutes of the GA).
- Forget about IOC recognition. This all looks like kindergarten. We have been use to it for decades (litterally) and we could live - actually simply survive - in this context. For the outside, this is unacceptable. Only strong and powerful sports federations can afford to play divas. Not us.

I am a bit frightened.

Posts: 2062
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2002 16:43
Real name: Alexander Presman
Location: the Netherlands

Post by A.Presman » Thu May 22, 2003 10:48

I really appreciate your approach.
In many points I'm fully agree with you ( it is not a coincidence that we left Managing Board on the same day? )

Still to be clear - the letter of majority of federation declared invalidity of elections of the first day. So it effects also Managing Board.
The later elections appointed some persons as members of the Managing Board on ad-interim basis with the idea that in about 3 months new General Assembly will be held and the Managing Board will be elected there.

About kindergarten - it was so for many years. Only we managed to hide it from the external World.
Fairy tales about IOC were nice and widely used for election's program. But did ever someone believed in the realism of it?
Draughts sport needs great organisational evolution to get a right to knock to the Olympic door.
Without such a reorganisation FMJD was a soap bubble. And you know what happens with soap bubbles. Earlier or some later.

George Miller (CDC)

Propaganda not minutes

Post by George Miller (CDC) » Thu May 22, 2003 18:34

It seems to me that to refere as the document in this posting as minutes strays somewhat from the truth. The minutes of any meeting are prepared and released by the official body convening the meeting - and in full. What Mr Pressman represents on his site is a very bias view by the breakaway group he refers to. Where is the letter referred to in the so called minutes? If this is any example on how this new group proposes to conduct business I would humbly suggest that we stick with the board as elected at the civilised proceedings of the previos day.

A point of order FMJD adII 19 of Statutes Article XVII Re-election of the executive board. "The members of the Executive Board whose time on the board has expired and who are eligible by the General Assembly, can be re-elected without the procedure for renewed candidacy." Therefore there was no requirement for WAlter van Beek to be proposed formally as it is his right as stated in FMJD Statutes.

Jacques PERMAL
Posts: 3384
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 09:15

Is it necessary ?

Post by Jacques PERMAL » Thu May 22, 2003 19:10

Somtimes, crisis is necessary to oblige everyone to think consistenly about their situations. It was the case of Draughts french federation in the last 8 years.
Beginning of 2003 was organised poll. There were two teams.
The new board is recognized by all the players.
Now there are not quarrels matters. Everybody work together.
Information : my first priority !!

L'info en première ligne !!

Nicolas Guibert
Posts: 48
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 17:28

Post by Nicolas Guibert » Fri May 23, 2003 10:59

So, Is Mr I. Shovkoplias the new president of the FMJD ?

Let us be clear please !

By the way, who is Mr I. Shovkoplias ? I had never heard of him before ?!?!?!

Pieter Hildering

Crisis, what crisis.

Post by Pieter Hildering » Fri May 23, 2003 11:35

it is time for a new aproach for the FMJD. Mr van Beek has to realize that
the key to this problem has been created by several different problems.
1. Unbalanced financial situation within the FMJD. The result of that is that
we are most of the time unable to organize the championships in a propper manner.
2. Illigal usage of the FMJD reglement is not acceptable, if even the chairman does not commit himself to these reglements that it is obvious
that he can not stay inplace.
3. After 11 years with no results in a financial way it is time to make up
the conclusions and look for a new chairman.
On the other hand players have to realize themselfs that they have to seel their sport in a commercial manner. I believe that every one should understand that and act to it.
Towards the KNDB president Mr. Theo, I was supprised by the letter on the
KNDB web.This letter shows that we are still in a position that a new
aproach is far away as far as the KNDNB is conserned. It is chocking that
a preseident can speak in two directions. Having different opinions.
So the future does not look bright if everyone is not willing to participate
and sacrafice.

George Miller CDC


Post by George Miller CDC » Fri May 23, 2003 18:00

Pieter can you tell me the "illegal use" you refere to in "2. Illigal usage of the FMJD reglement is not acceptable, if even the chairman does not commit himself to these reglements that it is obvious
that he can not stay inplace. " that you posted?

Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 14:04

Minute of A.G.2003

Post by shadow » Sat May 24, 2003 11:46

The things have gone therefore. The Assembly has regularly gathered to hours 13,00 of the day 17 March 2003. Of the Managing committee they were present: W. van Beek, J.Pawlicki, J.Bus, R.Devroe, H.Macaux, Yatsenko. J.Bastiannet. The present Federations with ballot (vote) right were: Australia, Belgium, Bielorussia, Brasil, Estonia, France, Germany, England, Israel, Italy, Lettonia, Lituania, Mongolia, Polonia, Russia RDF, Russia RFDI, Senegal, United States (U.S.A.), Ucraina, Wales. Present without ballot right: Cameroun, Granada. The President Van Beek informs that.F.m.j.d. in the reunion of Madrid of the 16/5/2003 has become member to all the effects of the G.A.I.S.F. with ballot right. He communicates moreover that the successive objective is the understanding to demand the acknowledgment of International Olympic Committee (C.I.O.), such demand does not guarantee the good final outcome, but is preliminary to every acknowledgment. He then passes to illustrate the modification of the Statute that would have to allow to the acknowledgment more Federations than a same Country, but with the auspice however that single Federation for every Country is one. Such acknowledgment derives from the fact that Russia had to create one Federation with two Sections one for the 64 cases and one for the 100 cases. Moreover, currently the Russians who are playing in the Championship of the World are members of the new Federation that has been come to create in antite to that one already existing, and that involves that it could it are to you a Champion of the World without Federation. From that the proposal comes down to while recognize in order also the second Federation, with the obligation that within the 31/12/2003 these two federations find an agreement in order to gather in an only federation. It follows a debate, to the end comes put to the ballots (secret) and the proposal passes with 9 favorable ballots, 7 contrary ballots and 4 abstainers. Moreover one had wide debated on the right of ballot of 2 Countries the Bielorussia and the Senegal, in how much both introduce a debt situation that would not have allowed their ballot, both but they exhibited or they asserted of having from part of their Government the assurance that they would have received of the deep ones also for the payment of the affiliation. To fine both they came admitted to the ballot. It came then illustrated the situation financial institution of the FMJD. Some elucidations were asked relatively the Office to which head there is the Sig. Bastiaannet. It was explained that the Dutch Government allocates every year 7,000 Euro for the operation of the same office. One then passed to the approval and voting of the new system of ballot. Such voting previews that for every Country with only a Federation is to disposition 6 ballots, if in a Country there are 2 or 3 Federations the ballots come uniforms always remaining a total of ballots 6. To the end it was passed to the voting of the candidacies, have been elect to the unanimità: Henri Macaux - Director of the Tournements for the Young people 100 cases Eleonora Bubbi - Director of the Tournements for Adults 100 cases, Jaap Bus, Treasurer Rik Devroe, Secretary, Alexander Presman, webmaster, President International Problemistico Committee. Presentation of the two candidacies to President was passed then: Mr. Wouter van Beek - outgoing President, Mr.Shovkoplyas - Candidate Ucraino Presiden. Mr. Shovkoplyas has introduced its program - speaking in Russian - with the aid like translator in English of the G.M.I. Ygal Koyfman. The program of Mr. Shovkoplyas previews a strong support from part of the Ucraino Government. It has been made the promoted one that in the case he became President of the World- Federation, would have been assigned to the sum of 20.000,00 Euro salaries to it. Moreover the First Minister and Sergej Bubka (Champion of the jump with the auction, ucraino) would have helped to find it sponsorships that they allowed most important returns. He engages himself between the other to maintain in Holland the Office of Secretariat and to open of a second in Ucraina.
Then, before what that President would have made after become is that one to go in Switzerland in order to ask that the FMJD enters in the C.I.O. A series of questions is continuation, between which if also it were not become President it would have spold however its infuence in order to bring sponsorships. To the demand it has not been answered with a clean adhesion, in how much based the sponsorships on its election. To other question it has been engaged in the case did not maintain within a year, how much promised in financial terms to discharge itself. To the end one passes to the voting (6 ballots for Country) and the result is following: Mr. van Beek 22 ballots -Mr. Shovkoplyas 18 ballots. During the operations of it counts of the ballots, Mr. Levy representative for England and Wales illustrates the Statute of the World Checkers Federation that enters to make part like Section of the Approved of FMJD.. The Italian Federation had introduced own written demand to enter to make part of the WCF. Follow contacts directed with England and the United States. The reunion is closed to the 18.30.
18 May 2003 - hours 9.00.
It begins the second session of the jobs with the absence of Mr. Levy that however had left own delegations to Holland and United States. The President van Beek reads two letters of congratulations to him from the Turkmenistan and the Azerbaijan. Momentarily absent: France and Senegal. Motion from part of 11 Federations comes introduced one: Ucraina, Russia RDF, Bielorussia, Israel, Australia, Polonia, Brasil, Germany, Lituania, Mongolia, Lettonia. This motion asks the invalidation for all how much happened the previous day. Not the acknowledgment of the second Russian Federation. The right of ballot of the Senegal. Not the acknowledgment of the right of ballot of both the states England and Wales but only one United Kingdom. The invalidation of the nominations of the Managing committee and the President, in how much in theAgenda. was before previewed the nomination of the President and then the others, therefore it had not been followed the same. At first the argument has been begun. Then, Van Beek that was President of the reunion has been refused and it has been asked that it came replaced. Then first substitute of the President has been named Pawlicki in how much for Statute. During all the day has been a locked comparison. The end it was asked that it came re-united an other Shareholders' meeting between two months in order to allow the presentation of other candidacies. The President Van Beek became account that the maximum confrontation happened on the issue of its nomination, but also that there was a will from part of the Federations that had supported it not to only make one chosen "in the dark" on vague promises received from the Shovkoplyas candidate. The other Federations instead were attracted from the mirage of the appropriations and the promised sponsorships, introduced without some written, concrete support. To the end the candidacy of Van Beek was put to the ballots and Shovkoplyas but Mr. Wiersma that part of the Commission of verification of the ballots made tore the cards. To that point the President van Beek and the President of the reunion Pawlicki, closed the sitting. This is the official part.

That one off board says that they are only remained the supporters of Mr. Shovkoplyas, was proceeded to its election like President. 11 Federations remained: Ucraina, Russia RDF, Israel, Brasil, Mongolia, Lettonia, Bielorussia, Australia, Lituania, Polonia, Germany. The Germany and the Lituania were abstained preventively from the voting. The voting gave like result: 8 favorable ballots, and 3 cards white. Evidently they have counted also Germany and Lituania. Shovkoplyas President has been elect therefore. They came name to interim temporary: General Secretary: Y. Koyfman Director of the Tornei: To Lehman, Vice-President and Tresaurer Mr.Wiersma.

Eleonora Radin Bubbi
FMJD - Director Tournaments 100 cases

David Levy

Crisis in FMJD

Post by David Levy » Sat May 24, 2003 12:31

I was present at the FMJD General Assembly meeting on May 17th. I was the delegate for England and held the proxy for Wales. I was therefore able to witness what happened up tho the end of the election for President.

The election was conducted in a very proper manner by the incumbent President, Mr van Beek. First of all he mentioned that the nomination of Mr Shovkoplyas had come very late, but he nevertheless recommended to the meeting that Mr Shovkoplyas' nomination as a candidate for election should be allowed. This clearly shows a very fair attitude by Mr van Beek.

Then Mr van Beek said that each candidate would have about five minutes to present their case and then there could be questions from the floor. Mr Shovkoplyas and his supporters spoke for much more than 5 minutes, more than half an hour in fact.

Mr Shovkoplyas, as has already been described in this bulletin board discussion, made his platform for election the idea that he would try to bring a lot of Ukrainan government money into the game and believed he could succeed. He admitted when questioned that the Ukrainian government is not interested in Draughts but it is interested in having a Ukrainian as President of the FMJD. Of course it is easy to understand that, if Mr Shovkoplyas had been elected, the Ukrainian government would have no need to give any money to Draughts because they would already have their President, and without any interest in the game (as admitted by Mr Shovkoplyas) why would they give away hard currency which is so scarce in the Ukraine?

After Mr Shovkoplyas and his supporters had spoken Mr van Beek made his own speech, but it was very much shorter. First he pointed out that promises made in the past about Ukrainian money had not been honoured and that he did not believe Mr Shovkoplyas would be able to bring the large sums of money he was talking about. Mr van Beek then commented briefly on what he had done most recently for the FMJD, bringing it into the GAISF, and mentioned the stability he had brought to the FMJD.

In my opinion it is shameful to attempt to buy the Presidency as Mr Shovkoplyas did.

At the start of the process for voting, various supporters of Mr Shovkoplyas attempted to discredit some of the federations present, claiming that they could not vote. For example, Senegal. The delegate from Senegal had travelled from his country to Zwartsluis, at considerable expense. Senegal had contributed very significant amounts of money to FMJD events. Yet some supporters of Mr Shovkoplyas tried to disallow their vote. There were also some complaints made after the election that Wales is not a proper country and should not be allowed a vote, but Wales is also a member of FIFA and FIDE. If the governing bodies of the world's two laregst sporting federations, those for soccer and chess, both treat Wales as a "proper country", why do the supporters of Mr Shovkoplyas insult Wales in this way? The answer is simple, and it also explains why they attacked Senegal - they would try anything to get their man elected.

The voting procedure was seen by everyone in the room. The votes were written in secret and then counted in the open, in full view of everyone. Each country had two votes because the new system allowed each of the Russian federations one vote each. When the votes were counted Mr van Beek had 22 votes (i.e. 11 countries) while Mr Shovkoplyas had only 18 votes (i.e. 9 countries). Therefore Mr van Beek was the winner of the election and remained as FMJD President.

That is exactly what happened. Afterwards, when I had already left the meeting to return to England, the supporters of Mr Shovkoplyas thought they saw an opportunity to take advantage of the fact that two of Mr van Beek's votes had left the meeting (I had announced publicly that England supported Mr van Beek and it was logical for anyone to assume that Wales did so as well). So these supporters created, what was described to me later, as "Hell". Is this any way to behave? No it is not. Should control of the FMJD be trusted to the hands of people who behave in such a way? No it should not.

The FMJD is a democratically run organisation. The election for President took place on the afternoon of May 17th and Mr van Beek was elected. That should be the end of the matter. In my opinion any federation that does not respect the results of the FMJD elections does not belong as a member. It is a fundamental point for being a member of any organisation that one must respect and abide by that organisation's statutes, by-laws and regulations. This is the mark of a civilised society. Those who behave otherwise should be ashamed of themselves.

David Levy


O.I.C. 2006

Post by Guest » Sat May 24, 2003 16:26

This message has been moved to the separated topic

Posts: 2
Joined: Sat May 24, 2003 16:59

Post by Y.Koyfman » Sat May 24, 2003 20:00

Dear Mr. David Levy,
As you know I also was presented at the FMJD General Assembly on May 17, but contrary to you I didn't left it immediately after first election but stayed on.
First of all you mentioned that candidacy of Mr. Shovkoplias came very late and when someone read your post he could understand that that it was just a goodwill of Mr. van Beek to accept the candidature of Mr. Shovkoplias.
I would refer you to the Statutes ( Bye-Laws) of the FMJD:

Ad II. 19 of the Statutes
Article XVII Re-election of the Executive Board
...The candidates for functions on the Board have to be nominated in writing to the Office of the FMJD, if possible two months before the General Assembly.
behaving according to the Statutes of the FMJD is not a merit but basis and obligation of the activity of the President. The disrespect oh the Statutes is the shame to the President and later on we'll come back to the question how Mr. van Beek simply ignore the Statutes if it just in his personal favor.

Saying that
"if Mr Shovkoplyas had been elected, the Ukrainian government would have no need to give any money to Draughts because they would already have their President "
is just your opinion which doesn't take into account that Ukrainian governement had already supported in the past and is still supporting largely draughts without having an Ukrainian President and I wish that one day the whole United Kingdom will support draughts on the same way as Ukraine did, does and I hope will do in the future ( if of course you join to my pray)
Secondly you mentioned several times during the GA that you came to draughts from the world of chess. Also you say to your opinion Mr. van Beek had brought the stability to the FMJD. As a person who dedicated to this game ( draughts, not chess) almost 25 years of my life I'm telling that the only stability that Mr. van Beek had brought to our game is the stability of stagnation and degradation.
During the Presidency of Mr. van Beek the draughts is simply disappearing and just a simple investigation would prove that in all parameters draughts events had a downturn.

Question of Senegal. Without dispute about contribution of Senegal to the draughts - how does it correspond with the obligation of every country to pay their annual fee to the FMJD?
If you don't mind I simply quote the Statutes as is:
Ad II. XVIII of the Statutes
Article XIV Voting rights.
Only those national member federations who have fulfilled their financial obligations and are correctly represented at the General Assembly may vote.

It is clear that Senegal did not fulfill ( according to the information provided by the Treasurer and the President) their financial obligations could not vote on GA.

I don't understand why you did leave the GA just after the voting for the President. Were you not interested in the whole agenda of this GA but only in President's elections? It only says that you and not "we" were just interested in "your man elected" without real participating in the work of GA.

Of corse it is not all I'd like to say but just a short reaction to you post.

General Secretary ad-interim
Yigal Koyfman