Silence Agreement Definition

2. Immediately after this meeting, the secretariat adopts an interim text of the decision without a number and with a temporary title reflecting the fact that the decision is subject to a procedure of silence. The interim text is attached to this meeting. When someone is charged with a crime or charged with a crime, and he does not deny it, in general, it is very strong to assume that the charge is the right one. The rule does not apply to a prisoner`s silence when, after his release before a judge, another prisoner accuses him of having joined him in the commission of an offence. The expression of the procedure of silence appears in Appendix 1, Point A), “Application of a procedure of silence in the Permanent Council and the Security Cooperation Forum” of the OSCE Internal Regulation (2006)” … 4] … A proposal with strong support is considered to be agreed upon, unless a member opposes it before a specific period of time: silence means approval – or at least approval. This procedure is based on a member of a minority who fears that the lifting of an objection will expose him to charges of obstruction and therefore of risk of isolation. NATO, the OSCE, NATO, European Foreign and Security Policy (EU) and, without a doubt, many other international for a are being used as a procedure of silence by NATO, the OSCE.

[2] 1. The President may propose the adoption of a decision as part of a procedure of silence. Such a proposal must be made at a meeting, specifying the exact date of the expiry of the silence period. If a representative does not object to this meeting, the decision is deemed tacit. 3. Silence is deemed broken when a participating state has written to the President of an objection or amendment before the expiry of the period of silence. In this case, the President immediately informs the participating States in writing that the decision in question has not been adopted. It is not surprising that one enters into a discussion between two drafters with an argument, who repeat and repeat their thoughts over and over again; Sometimes this happens because they are afraid that when they stop their failure to react, they are misinterpreted as a sign that they agree. This interpretation is based on the false assumption that “a huge endless series” is the only alternative to “silence”.

That is not the case. With regard to the difference between dissent and silence, failure to warm up your disagreement and to do so continuously is not silence and therefore does not constitute consent. Withdrawing communication with a biased or belligerent editor does not give that editor the approval to do what he wants. Similarly, in the presence of a return, there is no silence or consensus. A draft text is distributed among participants who have one last opportunity to propose changes or changes to the text. If no amendments are proposed before the expiry of the procedure (if no one breaks the silence), the text is considered adopted by all participants. Often, this procedure is the last step in the adoption of the text, after the fundamental premises of the text have been agreed in previous negotiations. “Breaking the silence” is only a last resort in case a participant still has basic problems with parts of the text and is therefore the exception rather than the rule.