[CCWG-ACCT] Staff accountability

Kieren McCarthy kieren at kierenmccarthy.com
Thu Jul 16 01:45:22 UTC 2015

So it may be a US-UK disconnect but when I hear "personnel issues" I hear
things like: sexual harassment or bullying or internal argument or benefits.

I wouldn't advocate for the community reviewing any of those topics, nor do
I think would anyone else. And I certainly wouldn't see a community-led
process deciding it would review them either.

If by "personnel issues" you mean holding staff to account for the jobs
that they get paid they to do on behalf of the community, then we do not
agree. I think they absolutely should be held to account and be required
when the community feels it necessary to answer questions about how they
carried their job out.

To extend my Congressional analogy, recent hearing/inquiries that stick in
my mind include:

* The oversight hearing on the OPM data breach
* The hearings on the secret service actions on the White House intruder

These sorts of things.

I can see for example it being very useful for ICANN staff to be quizzed
publicly by the community on what happened with the recent security

That strikes me as a much better system that the internet community relying
on whatever ICANN staff decides to tell us through an announcement on a

There are of course also Senate Investigations - in fact I think ICANN's
top PR man used to be on a staffer on Senate inquiries - although I would
imagine this kind of thing would be rare in the ICANN world.

But this to me represents accountability: people being held accountable.
Being required to answer questions on particular topics.

Perhaps a better question would be to ask: why should the community *not*
have the ability to hold people accountable for the actions taken in their


On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:21 PM, James M. Bladel <jbladel at godaddy.com>

>  I am also reviewing the unredacted report, and share the concerns of
> many expressed here. That said, I also do not want to go down a path where
> the Community inserts itself in to the Staff chain of authority, or starts
> to micro-manage personnel issues.
>  There are other ways to implement Staff Accountability, and I hope we
> can have a comprehensive discussion of these in Paris.
>  Safe travels to all who are en route. See you there.
> Thank you,
>  J.
> ____________
> James Bladel
> GoDaddy
> On Jul 15, 2015, at 17:05, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>    Hi,
>  The big question for me is "to what extent can/should the community keep
> ICANN staff directly accountable". If the board cannot keep the CEO
> accountable and the CEO in turn cannot keep his/her staff accountable, then
> i think it is the board that the community should use all its fire-power
> against while i expect board to perform its "konfu" on the CEO as well. ;-)
>  I am not sure taking ICANN staff directly down the legal/IRP path as
> suggested will be an healthy thing to do. I think proper means of
> channelling grievances between a/some community member and staff needs to
> happen through the appropriate organisational hierarchy and the leadership
> of the organisation should ensure justice is done...i don't think such
> process should be lead by the community.
>  Regards
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Kieren McCarthy <
> kieren at kierenmccarthy.com> wrote:
>> One of the key things that Strickling mentioned in his accountability
>> blog post was that this group needed to devise accountability mechanisms
>> for ICANN's staff.
>>  There is a great example this week of how the staff currently lives
>> outside any form of effective accountability in the unredacted version of
>> the .Africa IRP decision.
>>  http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/15/icann_dot_africa_review/
>>  Not only did ICANN staff - its head of operations, no less - intervene
>> in favor of one applicant over another, but when that fact was repeatedly
>> referenced in what is supposed to be an independent review report, the
>> staff decided they would remove that information before the report was
>> published.
>>  This is a culture of impunity.
>>  What I would like to see introduced to ICANN is the ability to call for
>> hearings/inquiries into issues. Similar to how Congress can hold inquiries
>> into something, compel witnesses to appear, compel the release of
>> information, fact-find and produce a report.
>>  Having read all the various legal advice provided by the independent
>> legal experts, it strikes me that the ability for the community to
>> establish such an inquiry and then compel witnesses and evidence to appear
>> is not difficult to set up.
>>  Kieren
>> _______________________________________________
>> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> --
>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Seun Ojedeji, Federal University Oye-Ekiti web:
> http://www.fuoye.edu.ng <http://www.fuoye.edu.ng> Mobile: +2348035233535 **alt
> email: <http://goog_1872880453>seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
> <seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng>*
>  The key to understanding is humility - my view !
>    _______________________________________________
> 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/20150715/1a589668/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list