I'm told by someone near CEN that there are provisions to examine the voting results, and determine if they reflect properly those that are voting members, and that at least one member of CEN that had voted favorably before, neglected to vote in this last round, and that one vote would have allowed it to pass at CEN.
There is a provision under the Vienna Agreement (agreements between ISO and CEN for producing common standards) that indicates as follows:
5.7.2 After a positive result of vote in one organization and a negative result in the other one, a consultation between ISO/CS and CCMC takes place involving committee officers.
When taking decisions on how to proceed based on voting results and comments, committee leaders and secretariats have to take into account the decisions of the respective committees. If it seems likely that the negative votes which resulted in the text being disapproved can be resolved, a second parallel vote may be carried out. If the consultation shows that there is no immediate possibility for reconciling the comments that resulted in disapproval of the document, each organization proceeds in accordance with its own rules.
This information was provided to me by someone I trust, but I cannot confirm from my own experience the full details here provided to me.
So it would seem that there could be reason for another vote to be undertaken, to allow those that did not vote (by some accidental neglect perhaps? I hope). Or perhaps it is not such as difficult stretch to use the common instrument of the EN Annex Z, to resolve a detail of concern that must be met by the regulations that follow 93/42/EEC Annex II and V.
