According to RONR and the earliest traditions of parliamentary procedure, speakers must follow rules of decorum [maluhia] to preserve the peace and civility of the meeting. It is all too easy for debate [ho‘opāpā] to evoke passionate responses that degenerate into insults [‘ōlelo hō‘ino]. History has taught that insults, name-calling and cursing are incompatible with reasoned debate. For this reason it is particularly important that members speak only to/through the Chair, and avoid using each others’ names at all. Only respectful debate has any chance of being persuasive.
If debate were allowed to include personal attacks, it might intimidate many from taking part in the debate who might otherwise make important points. It would certainly leave hard feelings and foster personal antipathy in the group long after the debate had ended and the group's decision had been made.
--Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised In Brief (2nd ed.), p. 31
Debate must be confined to the merits of the pending question. Speakers must address their remarks to the chair, maintain a courteous tone, and—especially in reference to any divergence of opinion—should avoid injecting a personal note into debate. To this end, they must never attack or make any allusion to the motives of members. As already noted, speakers should refer to officers only by title and should avoid the mention of other members' names as much as possible.
--Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (11th ed.), p. 43, ll. 15-22
When a question is pending, a member can condemn the nature or likely consequences of the proposed measure in strong terms, but he must avoid personalities, and under no circumstances can he attack or question the motives of another member. The measure, not the member, is the subject of debate.
--Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (11th ed.), p. 392, ll. 13-18
Debate must be impersonal. All discussion is addressed to or through the presiding officer and must never be directed to any individual. The motion, not the advocate, is the subject of debate. A motion—its nature or consequences—may be attacked vigorously. It is never permissible to attack the motives, character, or personality of a member either directly or by innuendo or implication. It is the duty of the presiding officer to quickly stop any member who engages in personal attacks, discusses the motives of another member, or speaks or acts in a discourteous manner. Debate must address the merits of a motion, not people.
A parliamentary authority is a standardized manual of codified meeting procedures that an assembly may adopt to supplement any special rules of order prescribed by its governing documents. Since the adopted parliamentary authority and special rules of order primarily address conduct during meetings, an assembly may also adopt a code of ethics to cover conduct of members outside of the society's meetings. For example, Ka ʻAhahui Hawaiʻi Aloha ʻĀina (KAHAA / Hawaiian Patriotic League) adopted a Code of Ethics for Hawaiian Patriots on January 14, 2017.
Kulekele Pono no nā Aloha ʻĀina Hawaiʻi
Post by Keokani Kipona Marciel, MS
Loea Lula Hoʻomalu Kākau Inoa - Registered Parliamentarian (RP)
Blog of the Central Body of the Hawaiian Patriotic League
Nā Papaʻa - Archives
Nā Mahele - Categories
Ua Mau ke Ea o ka ʻĀina i ka Pono
The object of this League shall be to affirm the continuity of Hawaiian independence; to restore Hawaiian national identity; to exert all peaceful and legal efforts to secure for the Hawaiian People and Citizens their Civil Rights; and to ensure that the United States of America complies with international humanitarian law.