[CCWG-Accountability] Op-Ed from ITIF regarding permanent cross-community group as ultimate authority

[Carlos Raúl G.]

Dear Steve 

Are you suggesting we include changes in the bylaws within the scope of the working groups? I would have a few suggestions!

Cheers

Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
+506 8335 2487
Enviado desde mi iPhone

> El dic 17, 2014, a las 10:20 AM, Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org> escribió:
> 
> This pertains to our discussion yesterday about a permanent, cross-community ‘Membership’ group to hold ICANN board and management accountable to the community.  It was described this way in draft3 for work area 2: 
> 
> Amend ICANN bylaws to recognize a permanent cross-community representative structure (all ACs, SOs, Constituencies) with authority to:
> Appoint members of Affirmation review teams
> Review a board decision, or resolve a dispute (option to use independent panel)
> Approve changes to ICANN bylaws or Articles, with 2/3 approval
> Approve annual proposed ICANN budget
> Recall one or all ICANN Board members
> 
> One of the groups proposing a community of stakeholders as ultimate authority posted a relevant Op-Ed in a Washington paper today.  Daniel Castro of the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) wrote:
> 
> California state law applies since ICANN is a registered nonprofit corporation in the state. As such, California law allows nonprofit organizations to have statutory members. Gunnarson suggests that one way to provide an effective check on the ICANN board's power is to create statutory members of ICANN with extensive authority over the board. This authority could include removing board members, overturning board decisions, etc. The statutory members would likely include the chairs of the various ICANN "supporting organizations" and "advisory committees," such as the Address Supporting Organization (ASO) responsible for IP address policy and the Country Code Name Supporting Organization (ccNSO) responsible for managing the country  code top-level domains. To ensure that the statutory members do not hold too much sway, their actions could be limited to situations where there is a supermajority (i.e., consensus). 
> 
> We welcome further elaboration of legal basis to enable this modification to ICANN’s bylaws in conformance with California law.
> 
>  
> Steve DelBianco
> Executive Director
> NetChoice
> http://www.NetChoice.org and http://blog.netchoice.org
> +1.202.420.7482
>  
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20141217/1dd418c7/attachment.html>