Model Parli Pro

Language and Rules of HAMUN

HAMUN uses a formal Parliamentary Procedure similar to Model United Nations. A central guiding principle is to avoid personal pronouns when referring to delegates. Instead, delegates speak as, for example, “The delegate from (country name) …” This helps maintain a neutral, procedural tone and keeps focus on the ideas and positions rather than individuals. Memorizing key phrases and standard motions helps you navigate sessions smoothly, especially when you are new to the process. The language also emphasizes clarity in the sequence of actions: roll call, general overview and agenda setting, debate, closure of debate, and voting procedures. Throughout HAMUN, procedural integrity is maintained by distinguishing between points and motions, understanding who can speak, and knowing when to yield time or request information. The mechanics emphasize structure: motions introduce actions, points raise issues in procedure or parliamentary conduct, and speaking time is allocated by the chair according to agreed rules. Understanding these basics enables you to participate effectively, anticipate the flow of a session, and respond to the chair’s cues with appropriate formal language.

Parliamentary Procedure: Core Flow and Roles

In HAMUN, the session follows a general sequence: Roll Call, General Overview (including setting the agenda), Debate, Closure of Debate, and Voting Procedures. The director’s job is performed at the start of each session and involves reviewing points, explaining the difference between points and motions, and guiding the class through the different stages of the process. The director also reviews the order of business, clarifies the purpose and total time for each segment, and ensures that speaking times and procedural rules are followed. The procedure is reinforced by practice in the following stages: open session, set the agenda, open the Speaker’s List, conduct a moderated caucus, initiate an unmoderated caucus, facilitate the drafting of working papers, draft resolutions, and move into the voting procedures. During the process, delegates may propose friendly or unfriendly amendments to working papers and draft resolutions. Friendly amendments are supported by all members of the draft resolution, while unfriendly amendments are not unanimously agreed upon by the writers and must be voted on before the draft resolution itself is put to a vote. Typically, motions progress with simple majority voting, except in cases requiring two-thirds or higher majorities for certain actions (such as unfriendly amendments or the closure of debate). The structure also includes a review of the number and tier of speaking opportunities, ensuring a balance between pro and con arguments and a mechanism for questioning through points of information or points of inquiry.

Points in Model UN: Key Definitions and Uses

Model UN employs several standard points to manage procedure and information flow. A Point of Order is used to express that an error has been made in procedure by the Chair. A Point of Inquiry is used to ask a question about parliamentary procedure or about what’s going on in the committee. A Point of Information is used to request an answer to a specific question raised during speeches, the Speaker’s List, or the presentation of draft resolutions. A Point of Personal Privilege allows a delegate to interrupt a speaker for issues such as discomfort or inability to hear clearly. These points help maintain order and ensure delegates can access necessary information without derailing the debate.

Opening Session and Setting the Agenda

Opening Session and Setting the Agenda occur at the beginning of each topic and, in HAMUN, happen only twice during the conference. The procedure involves a delegate from (country name) moving to place topic A or B first on the agenda, which requires Simple Majority. There is also a motion to open the session, which likewise requires Simple Majority. The agenda setting establishes the order of topics to be debated and sets the stage for subsequent procedures such as the Speaker’s List and caucus sessions.

The Speakers List: Managing Speaking Time and Participation

Speakers List management includes two key concepts: Yield to Chair and Yield to Floor. Yield to Chair means you surrender any remaining time during your speech to the Chair and in return you receive two questions from the floor. The benefit is extra time to present your position, but the cost is that you will have fewer questions posed to you. Yield to Floor allows you to keep your original time and also answer questions from the floor in addition to the two questions you are already entitled to. The benefit is more opportunities to persuade others and gain support, but the cost is less time available for your prepared speech. A delegate can be on the Speaker’s List only once at a time. To be added to the Speaker’s List, a placard may be raised when the original question is asked or a note may be sent to the Dias. To be re-added, a note must be sent to the Dias.

What Happens Next: Points, Motions, and Moderated Caucus

After each speech on the Speaker’s List, the Chair asks whether there are any points or motions on the floor. After four or five speeches, the Chair may call for a moderated caucus. A delegate may motion: “The delegate from (country) would like to motion that we go into moderated caucus for (minutes) minutes for the purpose of (purpose) with a speaking time of (speaking time).” When proposing a moderated caucus, you must specify the total duration, the speaking time, and the purpose. The default speaking time is 30 seconds. During a Moderated Caucus, the Chair calls on delegates one at a time, and each speaker addresses the committee briefly.

Moderated Caucus: Format and Strategy

Moderated Caucus is described as a popcorn-style debate where delegates speak on their position. In practice, this means that delegates are allotted a set time, each delegate has an opportunity to speak, and to speak they raise their placards to be called on. This format encourages rapid exchange and allows a broad range of viewpoints to be presented in a structured manner.

Conducting a Moderated Caucus: Preparation and Participation

Entering a moderated caucus with a plan increases effectiveness. Beforehand, know your position, your goals for the caucus, and what you want to achieve. Consider your regional bloc and identify potential allies who may share similar views. During the caucus, present concrete ideas and articulate how your country’s position can contribute to the topic’s resolution. Take notes on what other delegates say, note areas of agreement, and consider writing down points you agree with to facilitate future collaboration. Keeping track of who supports your positions helps you form alliances and coordinate action.

Unmoderated Caucus: Purpose and Strategies

Unmoderated caucus serves to form blocs through informal discussion and to begin drafting working papers. It occurs after sufficient moderated caucus, as determined by the Dias. A typical motion reads: “The delegate from (country) would like to motion that we go into unmoderated caucus for (minutes) minutes with the purpose of (purpose).” As with moderated caucus, you must specify the length and purpose. In an unmoderated caucus, delegates negotiate freely, bargain, and consolidate ideas. Negotiation often requires concessions, but you should aim to preserve core objectives. It is important to begin recording ideas immediately and to use time efficiently since unmoderated caucuses are time-limited. Building relationships with other delegates becomes crucial in this stage and remembering colleagues’ names helps in continuing productive collaboration beyond the current session.

Working Papers, Draft Resolutions, and Resolutions: How a Topic Gets Solved

The process of solving a topic through formal documents begins with Working Papers, moves to Draft Resolutions, and culminates in Resolutions that pass through the voting procedure. Requirements for these documents include proper format and a sufficient number of signatories and sponsors—specifically, at least the fraction of the room: rac{1}{5} of the participants. Preambulatory clauses describe the rationale for the proposed solution and provide justifications for the approach being taken. Operative clauses describe exactly what actions will be taken to solve the problem. The Working Paper is the initial form of a resolution paper submitted to the Dias for approval. A Draft Resolution is an approved Working Paper, and a Resolution is a Draft Resolution that passes during the committee’s voting procedure.

Draft Resolutions: Presentation, Q&A, and Amendments

Draft Resolutions are presented to the floor just before the closing debate and voting phase. The presenting delegate states that the draft resolution is being introduced to the floor. Open floor to two questions or conduct a Q&A session through Points of Information. Friendly Amendments are those supported by all members of the DR, while Unfriendly Amendments lack unanimous support and must be voted on before the DR itself is voted on. This process ensures that amendments are considered and debated transparently, balancing flexibility with the need for consensus before final passage.

Example Resolution: GA/3/1.1 – Structure and Content

A representative example is the Resolution GA/3/1.1 from the General Assembly’s Third Committee. The document includes: Sponsors: United States, Austria and Italy; Signatories: Greece, Tajikistan, Japan, Canada, Mali, the Netherlands, and Gabon; Topic: “Strengthening UN coordination of humanitarian assistance in complex emergencies.” The preamble includes standard clauses such as reminding all nations of the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and reaffirming relevant resolutions (e.g., Resolution 33/1996, 25 July 1996). Preambulatory clauses such as these describe the justification for the proposed approach and provide context. Operative clauses (numbered 1 to 7) outline concrete actions: for example, encouraging UN agencies to collaborate more closely with grassroots governments; urging member states to comply with the UN Department of Humanitarian Affairs’ goals; requesting rapid deployment forces for better coordination; calling for a United Nations Trust Fund to attract private sector funding; stressing the need for impartial information on country situations; calling for swift and generous responses to consolidated appeals for humanitarian assistance; and expanding preventive and post-conflict reconstruction actions. Each operative clause may include subpoints (a, b, etc.) to specify steps or conditions. Note the use of semicolons to separate operative clauses and the requirement that resolutions end with a period.

Closing Debate and Adjournment: Final Motions and Timing

Two important motions conclude a day’s activities: Motion to Close Debate and Motion to Adjourn the Meeting. The Motion to Close Debate serves to proceed into voting on draft resolutions and the topic for the next stage of the committee. It requires a rac{2}{3} majority and typically involves 2 pro speakers and 2 con speakers. The Motion to Adjourn the Meeting, in contrast, is a Simple Majority decision to end the day and suspend debate until the next day. It is different from closing debate, which moves the process forward to voting on resolutions. The distinction between “closing debate” and “adjournment” is important for procedural clarity and time management across conference days.

Practice Topic: Social Media—Good or Bad for Society?

The final slide signals a practice exercise to apply the HAMUN procedures to a contemporary topic: whether social media is beneficial or detrimental to society. This practice session reinforces the mechanics of opening sessions, forming agendas, managing the Speaker’s List, conducting moderated and unmoderated caucuses, drafting working papers and draft resolutions, and using points and motions to steer debate toward productive outcomes. It also invites students to apply ethical and practical considerations—such as free speech, information reliability, privacy, and the impact on public discourse—in a simulated, rules-based environment.