Originally Posted by
Pierre Dénommée
FIDE uses such committees extensively. The Laws of Chess cannot be changed by FIDE wihtout a proposal from the Rule Committee, the rating rules cannot be changed without a proposal from the Qualification Commission... Those committees purpose is to assure that expert advice is taken into consideration when modifying some rules. The board of director could have no experience in organizing or directing chess competitions. Giving full authority to such directors would be dangerous.
Committees of members with authority limits the power of the board of directors in their field of jurisdiction. This can be very useful to prove that there is no political interference of the directors in a competition by ensuring that the NAC decisions are final. I have always been a very strong proponent of the separation of the sports side from the business side. Directors should raise fund and allocate money to the sports side but experienced persons should be running the sports side. The directors could know nothing about chess, but if they raise 100 000$ per year from their contacts, I am very happy provided that chess competitions are ran by competent persons.