[CCWG-ACCT] GAO meeting request

Mon Mar 30 12:59:15 UTC 2015

Fully in agreement with Greg, this is something that we need to be very careful with in our response, I would initially think that the suggestion of this week would not be possible, as we would need to gather input from counsel, decide on a format and scope of the meeting and determine how the group wishes the response to be formed and presented. Given Sidley’s extensive background in this area I would suggest that the chairs bring this matter to Sidley as soon as possible and that we initiate a dialogue internal to this group on how people wish this to be handled.

I agree we should not stonewall this, but any interactions with USG on the group’s behalf need to be highly planned, assessed and measured.

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Greg Shatan
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 1:50 PM
To: Edward Morris
Cc: accountability-cross-community at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] GAO meeting request

Mathieu,

I agree with Ed and suggest that Sidley be consulted on this immediately. Excellent points have been made in this thread.  However, I personally would not recommend "stonewalling" them and sending them to read our transcripts, etc. As between our two esteemed firms, Sidley has a significant presence in Washington and has lawyers deeply knowledgeable about dealing with the USG. Our team includes a former Congressman and a former General Counsel of the Deoartment of Commerce.  We will need to work with them to determine how to respond and how to handle the interviews, since we have more background on how ICANN (the community) works and may also need to point out some of the congressional activities to date regarding IANA (they did watch the latest Senate hearing) -- and, of course, we are the client.

Greg Shatan

On Monday, March 30, 2015, Edward Morris <egmorris1 at toast.net<mailto:egmorris1 at toast.net>> wrote:
Hi Mathieu,

Thanks for sharing this request with us.

I'm not particularly comfortable with placing you, Thomas and Leon in the position of representing the CCWG before a Congressional agency. I would simply direct the agency to our transcripts, recordings and documents, all online, should they want information about our activities. If after looking at these materials the G.A.O. has further questions they should feel free to submit them in writing and as a group we can chose how to respond and vet the responses together before sending them back to Congress.

My reluctance to fully comply with the GAO request, as proffered, is largely based upon the following reasons:

1. We're not a traditional heirarchical based organisation where chairs speak and direct the group. Rather it's the other way around. We all know this, you all know this, I'm not sure an outside organisation such as the GAO really would understand this to the extent necessary. I would hate to see your views be reinterpreted as representative of the entire groups as the GAO processes your interviews;

2. In the best of situations when interviewed by professionals folks occasionally misspeak. I don't believe that either yourself, Thomas or Leon are native English speakers. Word choice is sometimes a problem among non native speakers - I know it is for me when I converse in one of my secondary languages.. We saw this a bit in Istanbul where on occasion clarifications had to be made from the head table because the language used in presenting information was not precise and led to misinterpretations by some. I don't mean to be critical of the linguistic capability of our leadership trio - Leon, in particular, has an English language ability that surpasses my own. It's just in this highly politicised world I would hate for a moment of "misspeak" to be twisted or interpreted in a way it was not intended.

3. Politics. In a bygone era the G.A.O. truly was an independent nonpartisan research branch of Congress. I still want to believe it largely is. Sadly, with greater frequency the G.A.O. has been accused by some  of being a bit more partisan in its research. I would hate to see anything said by the C.C.W.G. leadership used in a political manner by those charged with this investigation.

If, despite the foregoing, it is decided that it is in the best interest of all to go forward with the interview I would respectfully suggest the following:

1. It be made clear to the investigators that yourself, Thomas and Leon are speaking for yourselves and not for the group as a whole during your interview, and

2. Prior to agreeing to do so you confer with our independent counsel as to their views and advice on the matter.

None of the foregoing should in any way be interpreted as anything critical of our fine co-chairs. It's just that he environment, poisoned a bit by Mr. Chehade's less than positive characterisation of the CWG leadership and work, is one in which I believe that caution is advised.

Kind Regards,

Ed Morris

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mathieu.weill at afnic.fr');>> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,

For your information, the US Governement Accountability Office has requested a teleconference with the co-chairs of the CCWG. Tentative date is currently discussed for next week (7 or 8 April).

Your inputs are welcome.

Best regards,
Thomas Rickert, Leon Felipe Sanchez, Mathieu Weill

-------- Message transféré --------
Sujet :

April 1, 2, or 3 Meeting Request CCWG-Accountability Chairs

Date :

Thu, 26 Mar 2015 17:45:11 +0000

De :

Healey, John C <HealeyJ at GAO.GOV><javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','HealeyJ at GAO.GOV');>

Pour :

'rickert at anwaelte.de<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rickert at anwaelte.de');>' <rickert at anwaelte.de><javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','rickert at anwaelte.de');>, 'mathieu.weill at afnic.fr<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mathieu.weill at afnic.fr');>' <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr><javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mathieu.weill at afnic.fr');>, 'leonfelipe at sanchez.mx<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','leonfelipe at sanchez.mx');>' <leonfelipe at sanchez.mx><javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','leonfelipe at sanchez.mx');>

Good day, Mr. Rickert, Mr. Sanchez Ambia, and Mr. Weill:

You may recall meeting my colleagues, Derrick Collins, Alwynne Wilbur, and Kate Perl at the ICANN meeting in Singapore in February.

At any rate, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has been asked by the Chairs of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and its Communications and Technology Subcommittee to review the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) proposed transition of  key Internet domain name functions to the global multistakeholder community. We are meeting with knowledgeable people and organizations to gather information for our work.

We would like to meet with you via teleconference to discuss the proposed transition from the perspective of the Accountability working group. We have provided a list of questions, below, to give you a better idea of the topics we want to discuss with you, and I’ll provide a teleconference line after confirming your availability (please “reply all” so that others can know of your availability). In addition to the discussion, we would also welcome written responses.

Would you be available for a one-hour time slot during one of the following blocks?
·         Wednesday, April 1st: 10:00 – 11:00 EST
·         Thursday, April 2nd: 11:00 – 12:00 EST
·         Friday, April 3rd: 10:00 – 11:00 EST

We would also like to meet with Steve DelBianco and Cheryl Langdon-Orr to discuss their work with the Stress Test Work Party. Please let me know if you’d like to be part of that meeting, too.

Thank you,

John

John Healey, Senior Analyst
Physical Infrastructure Team
U.S. Government Accountability Office
441 G Street NW, Washington DC, 20548
(202) 512-5006<tel:%28202%29%20512-5006>   |   HealeyJ at gao.gov<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','HealeyJ at gao.gov');>

_______________________________________________
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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/20150330/9d5dbe3c/attachment.html>