Under the Chatham House Rule, anyone who comes to a meeting is free to use information from the discussion, but is not allowed to reveal who made any particular comment. It is designed to increase openness of discussion. The rule is a system for holding debates and discussion panels on controversial topics, named after the London headquarters of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, where the rule originated in June 1927.
.jpg)
The ruleEdit
The rule was created in 1927 and refined in 1992. Since its most recent refinement in 2002, the rule states:[1]
When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.
Sometimes the reference is made to Chatham House rules.[2] However, Chatham House states that the singular should be used as there is only one rule.[1]
PurposeEdit
The rule is designed to promote openness of discussion of public policy and current affairs, as it allows people to express and discuss controversial opinions and arguments without suffering the risk of stalling their career or even dismissal from their job, and with a clear separation from the opinion and the view of their employer.
The rule allows people to speak as individuals and to express views that may not be those of their organisations, and therefore encourages free discussion. Speakers are free to voice their own opinions, and to contest the opinions of other participants, without concern for their personal reputation or their official duties and affiliations. The Chatham House Rule resolves a boundary problem faced by many communities of practice, in that it permits acknowledgement of the community or conversation, while protecting the freedom of interaction that is necessary for the community to carry out its conversations. It is designed to reduce the risk of what has come to be described as groupthink, where unpopular views are excluded from discussion, reducing the range of opinions an organisation can discuss.
The aim of the rule is to guarantee anonymity to those speaking within its walls so that better international relations may be achieved. The rule is now used internationally as an aid to free discussion.[3] The original rule of 1927 was refined in October 1992 and again in 2002.[1] Chatham House has translated the rule into Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish and Russian.[1]
The rule is a contrast (or a compromise) between private meetings, where revealing what was said in the meeting is forbidden, and on the record events where the discussion is completely public and attributed.
Generally, the Chatham House Rule is imposed as a condition of being allowed to attend a meeting or event: all participants are understood to have agreed that it would be conducive to free discussion that they should be subject to the rule for the relevant part of the meeting. The success of the rule may depend upon it being considered morally binding, particularly in circumstances where a failure to comply with the rule may not result in sanction.
UsageEdit
European Central BankEdit
The European Central Bank (ECB) sometimes adopts the Chatham House Rule. In May 2015, release of a speech, which adhered to the rule, by ECB board member Benoît Cœuré caused divided opinion as to its use and his self-publication. The Cœuré speech affected currency, and stock and bond markets.[4][5][6] Thereafter, ECB invocations of the rule for a question-and-answer session and opening remarks for Cœuré, respectively, by Vice President Vítor Constâncio and fellow board member Peter Praet, gained attention. An ECB governing council member Boštjan Jazbec also had, the same month, convened questions-and-answers, under the rule.[2]
Bilderberg GroupEdit
The Bilderberg Group uses the Chatham House Rule for its annual conferences, which feature between 120 and 150 prominent politicians, CEOs, national security experts, academics and journalists invited by the group's steering committee.[7][8] The practice has been criticized by some commentators, who view the conferences as a means for policymakers to make decisions without public accountability.[9][10]
See alsoEdit
ReferencesEdit
- ^ a b c d "Chatham House Rule". London: Chatham House. Retrieved 14 July 2014.
- ^ a b Fletcher, Laurence (25 May 2015). "ECB error spurs questions about policy disclosures". MarketWatch. Retrieved 26 May 2015.
- ^ Rislakki, Jukka (24 February 2011). "Informaatiouhat mietityttävät sekä virolaisia että suomalaisia" [Information threats worry both Estonians and Finns]. Suomen Kuvalehti (in Finnish). Helsinki. Archived from the original on 27 February 2011.
- ^ Jones, Claire; Fleming, Sam (20 May 2015). "Benoît Cœuré speech highlights central bank links to financiers". Financial Times. Archived from the original on 7 July 2015. Retrieved 11 February 2016.
- ^ Black, Jeff; Worrachate, Anchalee (19 May 2015). "Hedge Fund Diners Get ECB's Market-Moving News Hours Early". Bloomberg Businessweek. Archived from the original on 16 August 2015. Retrieved 11 February 2016.
- ^ Spence, Peter (28 May 2015). "ECB told off by ombudsman for fumbling market moving speech". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 1 December 2015. Retrieved 11 February 2016.
- ^ Gilchrist, Karen (18 May 2023). "A secretive annual meeting attended by the world's elite has A.I. top of the agenda". CNBC. Retrieved 23 May 2023.
- ^ "Secretive Bilderberg Meeting Draws Pompeo and Kushner". The New York Times. 31 May 2019. Retrieved 23 May 2023.
- ^ Skelton, Charlie (20 May 2023). "At Bilderberg's bigwig bash two things are guaranteed: Kissinger and secrecy". the Guardian. Retrieved 23 May 2023.
- ^ "The Secretive Bilderberg Group Is a Key to Understanding the Global Power Elite". The Wire. 18 June 2022. Retrieved 23 May 2023.