Minutes of the general assembly
18th June 2002, Porto, Portugal

Present delegates: 

I. Vrana (CZ), J. Doerup (DK), N. Damgaard (DK), Y. Epelboin (F), J. F. Desnos (F), K. Sarlin (FI), J.v. Knop (D), G. Young (IE), B. Cordewener (NL), W.B. Liebrand (NL), S. Slopien (PL), L. Ribeiro (PT), D. Tothová (SK), V. Mahnic (SL), K. Grabher (CH), A. Rothery (UK),


K. Simonski (BG), P. Uba (ET) – proxy, T. Kalmi (FI) – proxy, A. Ediberidze (GE), S. Martisius (LI), N. Andronaty (MO),  A. Sandalov (RUS) – proxy, N. Sukhareva (RUS) – proxy,  P. Mederly (SK) – proxy, E. Rubio Royo (ES), S. Berglund (S) – proxy, S. Marsden (UK) – proxy.


M. Zastrocky, J. MacDouquall, M. Seedig, P. Smulders, H. Dijkman, B. Bellerora, G. Palmer


1. Opening of the General Assembly

2. Election of scrutinisers

3. Confirmation of the validity of the Board meeting in London, January 29, 2002

4. Membership issues

5. Report on activities since last General Assembly

6. Report and approval of the final accounts of  the year 2001

7. Proposal of budget for the year 2002

  • Fees for the year 2002

8. Modification of the Statutes

9. Approval of Internal Rules

10. Approval of co-opted BoD members: V. Mahnic and A. Rothery

11. Future activities

a) Place and date for EUNIS 2003: confirmation of the location in Amsterdam, The Netherlands,

b) Place and date for EUNIS 2004: confirmation of the location in Ljubljana, Slovenia

c) Place and date for EUNIS 2005: proposals to the General Assembly

d) Collaboration with MAGPI on the EU – US grant program

e) Getting the national web pages in shape

f) Corporate seminar: the suggestion is to organize a corporate seminar each 12-18 months

g) EUNIS Academia: the proposal is to create a new activity consisting of a permanent education for higher education executives on subjects related to IT

h) Lecture notes in Informatics

i) Other activities: EUNIS prize….

12. Election of new members to the Board of Directors


1. The GA was opened by the president

2. Secretary Ivan Vrana and Stanislaw Slopien were elected as scrutinisers. They reported that 16 GA delegates were present, 7 had proxies and 5 were absent. The GA was able to adopt a resolution.

3. There was a discussion about the validity of the board meeting held in London in January. Professor Jan v. Knop maintained that the meeting, in his opinion, could not be considered valid. The president explained the time-schedule for calling the meeting. The agenda had been known to board members 2 weeks before the meeting. A vote of the GA was cast on the issue: Should the BoD meeting in London and the resulting changes in responsibilities in the board be considered valid.

15 voted for, 3 against, and 5 votes abstained.

4. Letters of endorsement were received from Romania in support of its application. The GA approved the membership of Romania. A letter of endorsement was still not received from Croatia. EUNIS will ask each country to provide a new letter of endorsement. A call for this will be made.

5. The president outlined activities that had taken place since the 2001 GA in Berlin including activities related to BoD meetings. Andrew Rothery outlined the activities and results of the strategic workshop held in London in January. Gordon Young suggested developing activities in relation to authentication of student data involved in student exchange. E-learning task force was launched: invitation for collaboration. The president’s report was unanimously accepted by the GA.

6. J-F Desnos presented a report of the accounts for the year 2001. This report was approved by the GA.

7. The treasurer explained his financial estimates for the year 2002. Year 2002 may be considered a transitional year as there are plans to change the membership subscription scheme. The fees for 2002 are to remain unchanged. The budget for 2002 was approved by the GA.

8. Different opinions were put forward for the suggested changes of the statutes. Yves Epelboin expressed the wish to increase the number of delegated from 2 to 4 but at the same time wished to maintain the principle of equilibrium between smaller and bigger countries. Others expressed the idea that universities might be seen as members in their own rights. Jan von Knop suggested that local organizations be asked for their views before furthers steps are taken. He also asked that EUNIS would clarify member benefits. Michael Zastrocky suggested that university membership be made “free” to universities whose staff attend the EUNIS congress. This discussion will be continued by e-mail. GA members are invited to send suggestions to the secretary by the end of September.

9. Internal Rules were approved as proposed with slightly modified wording of one paragraph as suggested by Gordon Young.

10. Item 10 was postponed to item 12

11. A proposal for the annual EUNIS conference nr. 9 in Amsterdam in 2003 was presented by Petra Smulders and Hans Dijkman from the University of Amsterdam. The GA approved the plans.

The location for the conference in 2004 was agreed to be Ljubljana, Slovenia. The local organizer will be Viljan Mahnic, who confirmed the willingness of his university to host the ev ent.

Invitations for hosts for EUNIS 2005 and 2006 were made.

Gregory Palmer (MAGPI) explained plans for a US – EU collaboration between business schools, financed by US and EU grants. EUNIS GA accepted to act as the European coordinator for the project. Partner institutions are to be identified by end of September. J-F Desnos was appointed as a project leader in charge of further activities in the project. EUNIS member countries are requested to up-date their web pages.

The General Assembly agreed to continue activities like corporate seminars, EUNIS Academia, EUNIS Elite Award, database of a good practice with running IS, etc.

12. Jan von Knop proposed the number BoD members to 12. This suggestion was not supported by the GA. There was another proposal to increase the size of the BoD to 9. This was accepted by the GA. Three candidates were proposed to fill the two places: Andrew Rothery, Viljan Mahnic and Natalia Soukhareva. A secret ballot was held with a result:

  • V. Mahnic – 21 votes
  • A. Rothery – 20 votes
  • N. Sukhareva – 3 votes

and, therefore, the following two candidates were elected: Andrew Rothery, Viljan Mahnic.


Recorded by Ivan Vrana, Jens Doerup and Andrew Rothery