DEBATE COMPETITION

BRAWIJAYA ENGLISH TOURNAMENT 2019

RULES & REGULATION
DEBATE
TECHNICAL MEETING

BRAWIJAYA ENGLISH TOURNAMENT 2019

 ROUNDS

Day 1 : Technical Meeting

Day 2 : Preliminary Rounds

Day 3 : Octo, Quarter, Semi & Grand

Finals
 GENERAL RULES
• Participants are permitted to use printed material during preparation
(case building) and during the debate but not during the speech.
Printed material includes books, journals, newspapers and other
similar materials
• No gadget allowed in case building session and during debate
• During case building, advisors and coaches are not allowed to involve
with the debaters. Advisors and coaches may watch the debate after
case building ends
 Preliminaries
• There will be 4 preliminary rounds on first day
• All teams should participate in all 4 rounds in order to be eligible to break
• The first, second, and third rounds are open rounds, means that adjudicators should give
decisions and verbal adjudications for the debaters and debaters may ask for constructive
feedback
• The fourth round will be silent round
 Elimination rounds
• There will be 16 teams that are eligible to proceed to elimination
rounds
• Teams will be determined based on VPs, then speaker scores, then
margins
• Teams who breaks shall come to the following day to continue the
competition
• Teams who didn’t break are encouraged to come and see the
eliminations
 Debate: General Overview
• Asian Parliamentary Format will consist of 3 members for each teams
• Each speakers should speak for no longer than 7 minutes 20 seconds
• Reply speakers should speak for no longer than 4 minutes 20 seconds
 General Overview: Motions
• Issue or topic that you will debate upon. Motion exist to create or support a change or to prove
something is favorable or not favorable

• Example of motions:
• This house believes that there should be limitation towards media informing terrorism news
• This house would legalize abortion
• This house supports privatization of public hospital

• Government: defend/supports the motion

• Opposition: oppose the motion

 General Overview: Speakers

1st Government (7 min) 1st Opposition (7 min)

2nd Government (7 min) 2nd Opposition (7 min)
3rd Government (7 min) 3rd Opposition (7 min)
Reply Government (4 min) Reply Opposition (4 min)
 General Overview: Speaker Roles
Goverment Opposition
• 1st speaker • 1st speaker
• Create set up – Give negation
• Present fundamental – Provide responses
arguments
– Present fundamental arguments
• 2nd speaker
• 2nd speaker
• Provide response to
negative’s case – Provide responses
• Develop previous arguments – Develop previous arguments
• 3rd speaker • 3rd speaker
• Clarify the whole debate – Clarify the whole debate
• Provide comprehensive – Provide comprehensive responses
responses
 General Overview: Speaker Roles
Goverment Opposition
• 1st speaker • 1st speaker
• Create set up – Give negation
• Present fundamental arguments – Provide responses
• 2nd speaker – Present fundamental arguments
• Provide response to negative’s • 2nd speaker
case
• Develop previous arguments – Provide responses
– Develop previous arguments
• 3rd speaker
• Clarify the whole debate • 3rd speaker
• Provide comprehensive responses – Clarify the whole debate
– Provide comprehensive responses
 Team’s Case
• Case is a complete set of argumentation to defend or oppose the
motion
• Consists of
• Set up: definition of a motion into a debatable context
• Arguments: reasoning why your team is right
• Responses: reasoning why your opponent is wrong
 Set up: Definition
• The motion must first be defined by the Government team. A definition
clarifies the motion and gives clear boundaries to the motion, limiting what
the debate will be about into a focused area of discussion.
• The definition should take the motion as a whole, defining individual words
only if they have a important role. If necessary, a definition may include
setting up some parameters (of measurements, etc.).
• A definition must be reasonable:
it must be debatable (i.e. there exists a reasonable opposition)
it must have a clear link to the motion
• Opposition must accept the definition, but they have the right of
challenging the definition
 Set up: Definition
• Know what should be defined. Ex: THBT South Korea should advocate for the
recognition of North Korea as a nuclear state. In this example you would define
what is a nuclear state.

• Giving example. Ex: sharing economy (i.e. Airbnb).

• Try what it is not/the opposite. Ex: dictatorship=It has no freedom of speech. It

has no democratic election.

• Define the verb / action words . Ex: THBT South Korea should advocate for the
recognition of North Korea as a nuclear state . You would define, advocate as=
actively support the recognition in the UN and suppress any aggression by
Western state due to North Korea Nuclear development.
 Set up: Problem
• Identify what the motions seek to change and what are its goal. For
example, in the motion THW privatize essential public services.
• Identify what are the interest of TH
• Identify the characterization of the object that you’re debating. For
example, THW allow corporations to buy the rights to govern
economically failing cities.
• Identify the characterization of the context you’re debating on. For
example; In newly democratized country, THW postpone election until
most part of population has received basic education
 Model/mechanism
• Model is not always required in a debate, depends on what the
motion wants
• Propose a model only if you think :
• Problem exist and SQ fail to solve
• A comprehensive mechanism is needed to avoid unnecessary or excessive
damage to certain actor you wish to protect
• It is potential to be exist

• Model must answer the problem addressed in SQ

 Definition Challenges?
• A negative team may only challenge a definition on the grounds that :
 Truistic definitions: These are definitions which are ‘true’ by nature and thus make the proposed arguments
unarguable and therefore unreasonable in the context of the debate.
 Tautological or circular definitions: This happens when a definition is given in such a way that it is logically
impossible to negate it. This is basically a stronger version of truism (i.e. it is a truism in the level of formal
logic).
 Squirreling: Definitions that are not tied down to the spirit of the motion and do not have a proper logical link
to the motion will constitute squirreling.
 Time and Place-setting: The subject matter of the debate cannot be confined to a particular time and place
(other than stated in the motion itself, if any). This is forbidden because it often requires debaters to have
specific, technical knowledge.
• only do so if you are absolutely certain that the Government’s definition is unfair.
 Opposition stance
• Defending the SQ
• Proof that (a) status quo is progressing or (b) the proposal will bring
more harms than it already is in status quo. Ex: THW proposes
affirmative action for women in parliament
• Running a counter-proposal
• Proof that (1) requires the same amount of resource/efforts and (2) it
has to be mutually exclusive to the proposal proposed by the
affirmative
 General Overview: Motions
• Proposal motion
• The motion ask the debater to propose specific solvency to deal the problem
• Example: THW legalize abortion
• Evaluative motion (celebrate/regret)
• This motions usually debate on certain trends that are happening in the world. It’s question is why the
trends are regrettable? Or why the trends are worth celebrating?
• Notice that since the motions is not talking about a specific actor’s interest, the motion needs to
analyze how the trend affect various actors positively/negatively

• Direct comparative motions (TH prefer X over/to Y)

• If in any other motions opposition stance could vary according to their strategy, this
motions specifically set the comparative for opposition to defend, resulting into a
direct comparison for both team. It need to proof why X is better than Y?
 Arguments
1. Have a conclusive assertion

2. Ask what is the burden to prove my conclusion

3. Find the actors / examples / precedence to make the audience

believe on the likelihood of my claim
 Reply speeches
• Provides an overview of the debate, such as but not limited to
• what is the clash in the point of contention
• why you should win (biased adjudication), how your case outweigh the opponents’

• May be delivered by 1st or 2nd speaker

• Reply speakers are encouraged to emphasize their team’s strongest point and
direct the adjudicators to use it as their main consideration
• Reply speakers may not bring new matter
• Reply speech is not rebuttal
THANK YOU