What is the need of mandator's powers?

[anarosa-es]

I see in the new model that there is a differentiation between mandator’s powers and empowerments (representation powers).

For interoperability purposes, I don’t see the need of describing mandator’s powers. If any eMandates Registry has registered that a mandatee has some representation powers granted by a mandator, why that granting has been possible (the existence and legitimacy of the mandator’s power) is not relevant. For me, the relevant information is whether a mandatee can act on behalf of a mandator in some regards, i.e., what representation powers and constraints apply.

If I am wrong, Could you explain why the description of mandator’s powers and their legitimacy are necessary for eMandates interoperability?

Thank you

[paulakeen]

The need to justify where the mandator got its powers from comes from the situations where:

1. The mandator is delegating the powers to a second or third person, i.e. the mandator is a mandatee in another mandate.

2. The mandator is a "proxy" empowered by the law, but the power is not his or her personal right to act on his/her own; e.g. a psychiatrist or a judge that creates a mandate for a representative of an incapacitated person.

The second case, I'm afraid, we'd need to reflect a bit more on whether this is a real case or not and how to model it in RPaM. If anyone has faced this challenge/situation, please provide feed-back!!!

[anarosa-es]

Thanks a lot @paulakeen for your answer.

I understand that the situations mentioned by you are indeed common, but I only see their relevance in registration contexts.

Just for interoperability contexts, I don't see the need to know how a power has been able to be granted. I only need to know if some mandatee has o has not the representation power he/she claims to have.

Does your model also concern to registration issues? Is there any interoperability situation where knowing how a representation power has been able to be granted is relevant?

Unfortunately, I do not understand the context (or the view of reality) to model yet. Perhaps knowing the questions that the RPaM model should answer could help to establish that context.

[paulakeen]

We need to understand well this need you have about the registration you mention. It could have an impact on the model that right now we do not see.

Could we have a phone conversation on this before we have the next WG Meeting, please?

KR

[anarosa-es]

Of course. We can talk when you like. Do you have my contact details?

However, I (or Spain) don't have any need about registration. What I tried to say is that I see more things in the RPaM model than the ones I would include if we were talking about interoperability issues only.