[CCWG-ACCT] Concept of some form of "independent" member

Bruce Tonkin Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au
Fri Jul 17 08:56:30 UTC 2015

Also even apart from the language used in the bylaws, ICANN can also agree some of the powers via contracts with directly affected parties - e.g. gTLD registries, ccTLD managers, and gTLD registrars amongst others.

Bruce Tonkin

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tonkin 
Sent: Friday, 17 July 2015 10:55 AM
To: Accountability Cross Community
Subject: RE: [CCWG-ACCT] Concept of some form of "independent" member

Hello Greg,

>>  Members have a legally distinct role in a nonprofit corporation, particularly with regard to authority and decision-making vis a vis the Board. 

Yes I get that.   Members have a series of statutory  rights under the law of where the membership organization is incorporated.

However my understanding is that we are actually explicitly enshrining the powers that the community seeks into the bylaws.

So then surely the issue is then whether ICANN is adhering to the new bylaws.

The IRP is a mechanism to adjudicate if there is a dispute about whether the Board is adhering to these bylaws.   I hope that there are also some lighter weight mechanisms - reconsideration/ombudsman as a step before needing to use an IRP (which currently seems to cost hundreds of thousands of dollars  and that is just the panel's costs, and take years to resolve).

Then there is a need to ensure that the Board abides by the outcome of the IRP.

My proposal was how to deal with the unlikely situation where the Board goes against an IRP panel.

Bruce Tonkin

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list