The issue is that the Constitution does not define a process when it comes to this point, it does not define how the Order of the Pen instructs the Grand Chancellor, nor does it include a process as to what must happen. What I'm reading here boils down to people saying "Beatrice should have posted a topic on the forum and let the Order vote" however that is not what the Constitution says must happen, the fact it doesn't say that is something that was missed and what needs fixing here.
Now as to the consultation stuff, because of the issue created by there not being a stated process, we end up with a situation where what amounts to "instruction" is open to interpretation, the Order of the Pen prior to these inductions had 6-7 active members (based of the last writ of the Nobility) of which four have, based on this thread, been involved in discussions about some if not all of these names at some point, and based on Discord conversations there's clearly a desire for these members to be inducted. Without an established process that says specifically what the GC must do (posting of topic in a forum, waiting x amount of hours, etc), I'm prepared to accept Discord comments by people as amounting to "instruction" in this instance.
There's a difference between what the Constitution says and what Common Sense suggests. What we're differing on here is how we interpret the "on the instruction of existing members of this order." without a process for reference it's quite clear we're going to differ. Could/should she have she have done things differently? Probably yes. However her actions in my view fall within the scope of the Constitution.
There is no violation of the Constitution, because you simply cannot violate a process that doesn't exist, the criteria of good RP on the part of those inducted is met, the criteria of instruction by existing members is met. Sort the defining of a process out and we correct the issue.