RANDY JACOB, EDWARD L. JOHN, )
LESLIE JAMES, members of the Choctaw )
Nation Tribal Council, in their official )
capacity as Tribal Council members and as )
authorized and empowered representatives of )
the Choctaw Nation Tribal Council, )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
vs. ) Case No. C-82-1
)
HOLLIS E. ROBERTS, and ROBERT L. )
GARDNER, in their official capacities as )
Chief and Assistant Chief, respectively, of )
the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, )
)
Defendants. )

TAYLOR, Presiding Judge.

In this case the Court is called upon to resolve a dispute between members of the Tribal Council and Chief Roberts and Assistant Chief Gardner. The issue to be settled is the difference of opinion which the parties to this action have, in regard to the meaning and application of Article X, Section 3, of the 1979 Constitution of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

Article X, Section 3, provides:

"The Chief may call a special session of the Council at any time he deems necessary by notifying each member by the most expedient way, at least twenty- four (24) hours in advance of the meeting. Inability to notify all members after reasonable efforts shall not prevent such special session from occurring provided a quorum is present. The Chief shall call a special session upon a receipt of a letter signed by at least eight (8) members of the Tribal Council."

The petition in the case was filed on the 6th day of January, 1982, and after proceeding through the issue joining states, the action came on for trial on the 24th day of April, 1982. Through the cooperation of the parties, it was possible for the facts in issue to be placed before the Court by stipulation. Exhibits were also received without objection.

The Court finds that the Tribal Council wrote a letter to the Chief of the Choctaw Nation, dated May 9, 1981, wherein they requested a special session of the Tribal Council be called for 1:00 o'clock p.m. on the 15th day of May, 1981, at the Belvin Community Center, Talihina, Oklahoma. The facts further indicate that the letter was signed by more than the required eight members of the Tribal Council, and that it was delivered to the Assistant Chief on May 11, 1981, at 12:17 p.m. Although there is no evidence which would indicate whether or not the Chief received the letter and, if so, when he received it, the Court finds that the Chief did call a special session of the Council for the following Monday, which would have been May 18, 1981.
The Court further finds that in spite of the fact that the members of the Council had received no confirmation from the Chief that a special session had been called, several members of the Council did in fact meet at the Belvin Community Center on the 15th of May, 1981, at 1:00 p.m., and the legislation was adopted at the meeting.

After reviewing the provisions of Article X, Section 3, of the Constitution, the Court concludes that the provisions of the section give the Chief the exclusive power in regard to the calling of special session of the Tribal Council.

The section provides for conditions wherein the Chief "may" call a special session, and then goes further to provide that the Chief must call a special session when a proper request is submitted by the requisite number of Council members. But to interpret this section in such a way as to determine that the Council itself could dictate where and when such special sessions would be, would be tantamount to a decision that the Council could call itself into special session, and such a determination would be a violation of the powers reserved by the Constitution to the executive branch of the tribal government.

We further believe that when the Chief receives a request for a special session of the Council, which is initiated by at least eight members of the Council, he must act reasonable in his compliance with their request. From the facts before the Court in this case, we cannot find that Chief Roberts' actions in calling the special session for May 18, 1981, was unreasonable.
The decision in this case makes it necessary that we declare the legislation adopted by the Council at its meeting on the 15th day of May, 1981, at the Belvin Community Center, Talihina, Oklahoma, to be void.

Although it is regrettable, we must also find that the members who met at the May 15, 1981, meeting cannot receive remuneration from tribal funds for having done so.

I am authorized to state that Judge Jones and Judge Curtis concur in this decision.

Dated this 22nd day of May, 1982.

JOE C. TAYLOR, Presiding Judge