SECTION II RULES OF THE ALL-ASIAN INTERVARSITY DEBATING CHAMPIONSHIPS

PART 1: THE FORMAT OF THE COMPETITION.
1.1 The competition shall be run in two main phases: Phase one, which shall be known as the 'Preliminary Rounds' and Phase two, which shall be known as the 'Knock-out Rounds:
1.2 Phase one of the competition will incorporate at least seven rounds of competitive debating.
1.3 Phase one will be prefaced by one 'mock round'. This 'mock round' to be randomly drawn, the match-ups announced, thirty minutes preparation time allowed and the debates run and adjudicated in the usual manner. The results of the mock round are not to affect the overall results of the preliminary rounds IN ANY WAY, nor the draw for the first round proper of the competition.
1.4 Phase one of the competition is to be scored in the usual manner (see Part 12, 'Marking The Debate') and tabulated. The tabulation system must be 'power-matched', and teams in rounds two to seven are to be matched and ranked based on this system.
1.4.1 The sequence determining match-ups and results at the 'break' stage is as follows:
A) Win versus Loss record.
B)Points differential (all win/loss margins added together).
C)Overall Points total (all total team points in each round added together).
D)Head to Head Record (if teams have met during one or more of the preliminary rounds).

1.4.2 If there is still a tie after each of these stages of the sequence have been assessed, and there are places in the finals' series at stake, teams thus affected will meet in repercharge matches on the day before the break is announced and the winner (s) will advance.
1.5 At the conclusion of Phase one, the top sixteen ranked teams will advance to Phase two. Phase two is the finals' series and will be strict knock-out format (only winners advance).
1.5.1 Phase two will follow the sequence:
A)Octo Finals (sixteen teams).
B)Quarter Finals (eight teams).
C)Semi Finals (four teams).
D)(Grand) Finals (two teams).
1.6The team emerging victorious at the conclusion of the Grand Finals will be recognized as All-Asian Champions, and the institution they represent as Champion University/Institution for the year following, and until the next running of the championships.

PART 2: THE FORMAT OF DEBATE.
2.1 A debate will consist of two teams; one to propose the motion and one to oppose it. The team proposing may be known as 'The Proposition', 'The Affirmative' or 'The Government'. The team opposing may be known as 'The Opposition' or 'The Negative'.
2.2 A debate shall be run under the auspices of a 'Speaker' who shall be referred to as 'The Speaker of the House' or 'Mister/Madam Speaker'.
2.3 A debate shall be adjudicated by a panel comprising an odd number of adjudicators. One of these shall be designated as Chairperson, by the organizers, and may function as Speaker in the event that none has been nominated in a particular chamber (venue).
2.4 A debate shall be timed by a timekeeper. In the event that none has been nominated in a particular chamber, the function of the timekeeper is to be taken over by one of the panel of adjudicators.
2.5 Teams will comprise the following members.
2.5.1 AFFIRMATIVE.
a)Prime Minister, or Leader of the Affirmative.
b)Deputy Prime Minister, or Second Affirmative.
c)Government Whip, or Third Affirmative.
2.5.2NEGATIVE.
a)Leader of the Opposition, or Negative.
b)Deputy Leader of the Opposition, or Second Negative.
c)Opposition Whip, or Third Negative.
2.6 Debaters (or members) will speak in the following order:
i)Prime Minister, or 1st Affirmative.
ii)Leader of Opposition, or 1st Negative.
iii)Deputy Prime Minister, or 2nd Affirmative.
iv)Deputy Leader of Opposition, or 2nd Negative.
v)Government Whip, or 3rd Affirmative.
vi)Opposition Whip, or 3rd Negative.
vii)Negative Reply (given by 1st or 2nd Negative).
viii)Affirmative Reply (given by 1st or 2nd Affirmative).
2.7 Speakers not 'holding the floor' may not rise during speechunless it is to offer a 'Point of Information' (see Part 5: 5.5-5.9). Speakers doing so, or considered to be heckling, barracking or whose behavior is interfering with the acceptable course of a debate will be declared 'out of order' or will be 'called to order' by the Chairperson.
2.8 Interjections should be brief, pertinent and preferably witty. Interjections are comments made by members directed at the speech of the member holding the floor, and made from a seated position.
2.9 Points of order and points of personal privilege are prohibited.

PART 3: MOTIONS.
3.1 Motions must reflect the international nature of the All-Asians, as a competition, and the currency of regional and global issues.
3.2 Motions must reflect the theme of the current round of competition (if stated).
3.3 Motions must be worded clearly.
3.4 Three motions must be offered in each competitive round.

PART 4: PREPARATIONS
4.1 Mach-ups and venues to be announced before motions are revealed.
4.2 Three motions are to be announced/revealed to teams 30 minutes prior to the commencement of debates in that round.
4.3 The motion to be debated in a particular chamber between the teams matched therein is to be chosen in the following manner: 4.3.1The teams discuss preferred choices separately(less than 2 minutes). Number the motion in order of preference (1-most preferred, 3-least preferred).
4.3.2The teams identify each other before leaving the briefing room/area.
4.3.3 Teams compare preferences:
a. third choice motions are automatically vetoed
b. if teams' first choice motion is the same, they debate that motion
c. if teams' first choice motions are different, but the third is the same, they toss a coin, affirmative representative calls and if calling correctly, teams debate affirmative first choice. If calling incorrectly teams debate negative first choice.
4.3.4 Teams are then, AND ONLY THEN, permitted to leave the briefing room/area and begin their preparations.
4.4 The Affirmative have the right to prepare in chambers (venue).
4.5 Printed and prepared materials may be used during the thirty-minute preparation period. No access to electronic media nor electronic storage or retrieval devices is permitted after motions have been released. Printed and prepared materials may be accessed during a debate, but MAY NOT be used during
a speech.
4.6 Teams must prepare on their own. Once motions have been released, there must be no contact between debaters in a particular team and their reserves, coaches, trainers, observers or any other individual for the purposes of assistance in the context of the debate. Such contact and assistance is 'cheating' and will be punished by the disqualification of teams thus affected-from the round in question, at the least, and the competition, at the most -the latter, at the discretion of Council.
4.7Teams must arrive at their chamber within ten minutes of the scheduled/given time of commencement of debate.
4.7.1 Teams failing to arrive in time will forfeit the debate,at the discretion of the chair of the panel(see: 12.3).

PART 5: TIMING
5.1 It is the duty of the timekeeper, or a panel member, or the Chair of the adjudication panel, to time speeches.
5.2 The timing of each speech starts at the moment that the member begins speaking.
5.3 Timings of speeches are as follow:
5.3.1 Preliminary Rounds:
Constructive Speeches 7 minutes.
Reply Speeches 4 minutes.
5.3.2 Octos, Quarters and Semis:
Constructive Speeches 8 minutes.
Reply Speeches 4 minutes.
5.3.3 Grand Final:
Constructive Speeches 10 minutes.
Reply Speeches 5 minutes.
5.4 Time signals will be given in the following manner,
5.4.1 Preliminary Rounds:
Constructive Speeches.
End of first minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of sixth minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of seventh minute - double knock of the gavel.

Reply speeches.
End of third minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of fourth minute - double knock of the gavel.
5.4.2 Octos, Quarters and Semis:
Constructive Speeches.
End of first minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of seventh minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of eighth minute - double knock of the gavel.
Reply Speeches.
End of third minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of fourth minute - double knock of the gavel.
5.4.3 Grand Final:
Constructive Speeches.
End of first minute - single knock o the gavel.
End of eighth minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of tenth minute - double knock of the gavel.
Reply Speeches.
End of fourth minute - single knock of the gavel.
End of fifth minute - double knock of the gavel.
5.5 Points of Information may be offered during constructive speeches, after the first single knock of the gavel and up to the second single knock of the gavel. Points of Information may not be offered during the first and last minutes of constructive speeches. Points of Information may not be offered during reply speeches.
5.6 A 'Point of Information' must be indicated by a member of an opposing team rising from his/her seat, placing one hand on top of his/her head and extending the other towards the member holding the floor. A member offering a Point of Information may draw attention to the offer by saying "on that point Sir/Madam," or similar.
5.7 A member holding the floor must respond to an opposing member, or members offering Points of Information, in one of the following ways.
5.7.1 A clear gesture or hand signal rejecting the offer.
5.7.2 A verbal rejection of the offer, or
5.7.3 A verbal acceptance of the offer.
5.8 If a Point of Information is accepted, the point should be phrased as a question, or clarification, or comment, and made in two sentences (or less) or approximately 15 seconds.
5.9 If a Point of Information is accepted, the speaker accepting it must frame an answer or response to it within the context of his/her speech.

PART 6: ADJUDICATION.
6.1 Debates in Phase one of the competition will be adjudicated by panels of three adjudicators, or, where this is not possible, by a single, experienced adjudicator
6.2 Debates in Phase two of the competition will be adjudicated by a minimum of three (octos) and a maximum of 5 adjudicators. The final will be adjudicated by a minimum of seven and a maximum
of nine adjudicators.
6.3 Breaking adjudicators should have adjudicated in at least 5 of the 7 preliminary rounds in Phase one, not including the mock round.
6.4 Adjudicators advancing into the finals' series after breaking must possess credible experience (breaking as an adjudicator at Worlds, Australians or All-Asians previously), qualifications (AIDA, or similar accreditation or similar) and have demonstrated consistency during the current competition.
6.5 Adjudicators will arrive at their decisions on an individual basis, fill in the necessary ballots and pass their completed forms and ballots to the Chairperson. The decision will be a panel decision. Prior to the announcement of the decision, the Chair may call upon the other panel members for the purposes of:
6.5.1 Determining 'Best Speaker' nominations (if any).
6.5.2 Calling upon one of the other panel members to give feedback in the event of the Chair being on the minority side of a split decision.
6.6 At the end of a debate, Chairs of panels will announce the decision and give an oral adjudication. This is to occur in every round of competitive debating except for the Grand Final.
6.7 Chairs may not announce marks, nor indicate the margin of win/loss unless asked to by the Chief Adjudicator of the competition. All adjudicators are expected to observe the confidentiality of individual and team scores, and margins
6.8 Adjudication will be based on the awards of marks in three categories: Matter (40%), Manner (40%) and Method(20%), for individual speeches and a team's response to the dynamics of the debate. (see Parts 9, 10 and 11).

PART 7: DEFINITIONS.
7.1 The definition is the interpretation of the motion as put forward by the Prime Minister, or Leader of the Affirmative, in his opening remarks.
7.2 The definition should be reasonable.
7.3 The definition should state the issue or issues arising out of the motion to be debated, state the meanings of any terms in the motion requiring clarification and display clear and logical links to the wording and spirit of the motion.
7.4 The definition should not be
7.4.1 A truism (a matter stated as fact).
7.4.2 A tautology (a definition which, in development, proves itself).(because neither allows any reasonable substantive case to be mounted in opposition).
7.4.3 Place set (setting an unnaturally restrictive geographical or spatial location as its major parameter).
7.4.4Time set (setting an unnaturally restrictive chronological duration as its main parameter).
(because neither allows the opposition reasonable access to Matter).
7.4.5 Wholly unreasonable (displaying no clear or logical links to the motion).
(because it denies the opposition any 'reasonable' access to Matter and preparation).
7.5The Negative may only challenge the definition advanced by the Affirmative on the basis of one of these conditions pertaining
(7.4). The Negative may not challenge a definition supplied by the Affirmative on the basis that:
7.5.1 Its own definition is MORE reasonable.
7.5.2 A better debate will result. Nor may the Negative re-define terms or words contained in the motion so that a completely different debate is thereby set up. However, a Negative may contend with the specific or general approach to terminology supplied by the definition of the Affirmative.

PART 8: CHALLENGING THE DEFINITION
8.1 If the definition advanced by the Leader of the Affirmative contravenes any of the prohibitions set out in term 7.4, the Negative have the right to challenge the definition.
8.2 The challenge must be made in the speech of the Leader of the Opposition, following a clear statement that the definition is being rejected.
8.3 In the event of a challenge, the Leader of the Opposition must justify his/her rejection by supplying the grounds on which the original definition has been rejected. Furthermore, a substitute definition must be supplied, which the Opposition benches must then go on to negate.
8.4 The debate which follows is characterized by the use of the 'even if' argument, unless a truism has been categorically exposed.
8.5 If the Leader of the Opposition does not challenge the definition, no other speaker may do so.
8.6The onus to prove that a definition is unreasonable is on the Opposition.
8.7 Adjudicators will not indicate during the debate which definition hey find to be (more) acceptable.
8.8Neither team should abandon either the definitions or the challenges of its opening speakers.
8.9 Definitions should not require members of the house to have access to, or possess, specific or expert knowledge.

PART 9: MATTER.
9.1 'Matter' relates to the issues in debate, the case being presented and the material used to substantiate argumentation.
9.2 The issues under debate should be correctly prioritized (by teams) and ordered (by individuals), dealing with the most important/pertinent first.
9.3 Matter should be logical and well reasoned.
9.4 Matter should be relevant, both to the issue in contention and the cases) being advanced.
9.5 Matter should be persuasive.
9.6 Matter will be assessed from the viewpoint of 'the average reasonable person'. Adjudicators must disregard any specialist knowledge they have, even though pertinent to the issues under debate.
9.7 Bias will not affect an adjudicator's assessment (objective) or evaluation (subjective) of a debate. Debaters must not be discriminated against on the basis of religion, sex, race, nationality, sexual preference, age, social status, accent or any disability.
9.8 Points of information should be assessed according to the effect they have on both the cases of the offeror (team) and the responding speaker (speech and team).
9.9 A debater should take at least two points of information during a speech.
9.10 A Government Whip (Third Affirmative) may introduce 'new matter' into the debate, but is advised not to do so. ('New matter' in this context, means a new argument and does not refer to either new perspectives on an old argument or new examples, unless these change the course of the original argument entirely).
9.11 An Opposition Whip (Third Negative) is not permitted to introduce 'new matter' into the debate, UNLESS the argument is clearly in rebuttal of a new argument delivered at the third Affirmative.
9.12 No 'new matter' is to be introduce during Reply Speeches. The Reply Speech presents teams with an opportunity to focus on the major issue(s) in the debate and the way in which both teams approach that 'point of Clash'. The Reply Speech should also give an 'optimistic overview' of the general approach to the
debate by both sides and focus on the relative merits of the case by the side Replying, and the relative weaknesses in the case of the opposing team. Reply Speeches should neither continue rebuttal arguments nor advance old arguments into significantly new 'territory'.
9.13 All speakers must develop 'positive matter' in advancing their respective cases. A Negative team cannot rely purely on its rebuttal of the Affirmative case and must present a case in opposition.
9.14 Whips (Third speakers) may not give reply speeches.

PART 10: MANNER
10.1 Manner refers to the presentation and delivery style of a speaker.
10.2The following list represents some of the elements which are, or may be, subsumed under Manner. The list is intended as a guide, rather than as a number of marking categories. It is the combination of these elements (rather than the accomplishment of each), in various proportions that contributes to an individual
speaker's style. The major influence on an adjudicator must be: 'Is the speaker's Manner EFFECTIVE in advancing the case?'.
10.2.1 a) Vocal Style : Volume, clarity, pronunciation, pace, intonation, fluency, confidence, authority.
b)Language : Conversational.
c)Use of notes : Should not distract, should not be read.
d)Eye Contact : With audience.
e)Gesture : Natural, appropriate.
f)Stance : " "
g)Dress : (only an issue if really inappropriate to the place or occasion).
h)Sincerity : Believability
i)Personal Attacks : (derogatory comments are not to be tolerated).
j)Humor : Effectiveness of ... appropriacy.
10.3 Participants in All-Asians' debates must be aware that they will experience many different debating styles from the different universities and nations represented therein. There is no single 'correct' or 'right' style to adopt in this competition. Nor should a speaker's style be dismissed as inappropriate in the national
context of the adjudicators or debaters who witness it.
10.4 As with Matter (9.7) personal bias must not be allowed to influence an adjudicator's assessment of Manner.

PART 11: METHOD.
11.1 There are three major elements in the context of debating Method. These are:
11.1.1 Individual Method (speech).
11.1.2 Team Method (Case structure and organization).
11.1.3 Response to the dynamics of the debate (POIs, interjections and the effectiveness, currency and
relevance of rebuttals).
11.2 Individual Method pertains to the structure and organization of an individual speech. This may be evident in a reasonably clear outline of the responsibilities of the speaker and the order of the issues to be dealt with in his/her speech. It may also be apparent in the degree of fluency with which a speech moves from one point to another in a clearly logical sequence. Similarly, a speaker may 'signpost' his/her transitions from one phase to another.
11.3 Individual Method pertains to the 'balance' of a speech. Whereby, an equable division of speaking time is made to allow each of the phases of the speech a reasonable time for development (opening remarks, rebuttal, own points, summary, etc).
11.4 Individual Method pertains to good time management and good time keeping.
11.4.1 Overtime speeches : Once the double knock of the gavel has sounded, speakers have a 20-second 'grace period', during which they should conclude remarks already under contention. It is not a time for new matter to be introduced, and such new matter will be discounted by the adjudicators. Speakers continuing after this 'grace period' will be penalized in the Method category.
11.4.2 Undertime Speeches : If the speaker concludes his/her speech on or near the second single knock of the gavel, he or she will not be penalized for an undertime speech. However, if significantly undertime, a speaker may be penalized under Method and possibly also under Matter. The latter, assuming that less matter was advanced, or that it was clearly underdeveloped.
11.5 Team Method pertains to the effectiveness of the team's case organization and structure as a whole.
11.6 Team Method pertains to the equable division of roles (speakers) and responsibilities during a debate and the effective acquittal of those roles and responsibilities.
11.7 Response to the dynamics of the debate pertains to the reactive abilities of speakers and teams to the ongoing strategies being employed by both sides, and the shifts in the balance of power from one side to another.
11.8 Teams and speakers should respond to clear strategic issues, not minor 'slips of the tongue' or insignificant points.
11.9 Dynamic response may also affect Matter marks for a speaker in cases where the identification of a vital point, the cogent analysis of this point in the context of the debate and a balanced attack on it is developed in an ensuing speech.
11.10 Team members may keep time and signal members holding the floor. Time signals may not be spoken aloud. Speakers may also keep their own time.

PART 12: MARKING THE DEBATE.
12.1 At the end of every debate, each adjudicator must complete their adjudication forms. In addition, the Chairperson must complete a 'Speed Ballot' form on receiving the completed forms of other
panelists and before starting the feedback.
12.2 There are no draws in competitive debating!
12.3 Teams failing to turn up for the debate on time, and with no valid reason, will lose the debate by the widest possible margin. The winning team in such a case will be given the mean average score for all winning teams in that particular round.
12.4 Composite teams winning (or losing) debates will be marked, tabulated and matched for subsequent rounds in the normal way. Composite teams will not be considered as potentially breaking
teams.
12.5 Marks shall be awarded to speakers based on the following
12.5.1 An 'average' speech shall be awarded
Matter : 30/40
Manner : 30/40
Method : 15/20
-----------------------
Total: 75/100
12.5.2 Downwards from this average, the worst speech in the history of debating would still get 69 or 70/100.
12.5.3 Upwards from this average, the best speech in the history of the world would only get 80 or 81/100.
(This spread is most commonly represented by a +/- 2 mark swing in constructive speech marking and a +/- 1 mark swing in reply speech marking).
12.6 Reply speeches are to be marked out of a total of 50 marks (or 100/2).
12.7 Half marks cannot be awarded for constructive speeches but may result from the division of a reply speech mark.
12.8 The 'average' mark for an 'average team' is therefore: 75+75+75+37.5 = 262.5
12.9 The weak low is therefore: 70+70+70+35 = 245.
12.10 The strong high is therefore: 80+80+80+40 = 280.
A possible mark spread of 35 points is unacceptable for the purposes of power match tabulation. Therefore...
12.11 Adjudicators must determine, at the conclusion of a debate a) whether the standard of the debate was average, higher than average or lower than average, and b) whether the margin of win/loss was (subjectively) close, clear or a thrashing.
12.12 Adjudicators must manipulate marks accordingly to reflect their perception of the nature of the debate and the winning margin, by following the maximum mark differentials (between the total marks of the two teams) of:
12.12.1 Close win = 0.5 to 3 points.
12.12.2 Clear win = 4 to 7 points.
12.12.3 Thrashing = 8 to 12 points.