[CCWG-ACCT] ST18 breathrough text

[Steve DelBianco]

Agree, Matheiu.     You’ve got it all in one sentence so there’s no disconnect or confusion.   So the full text of Article XI, Section 2, Item 1 would be:

j. The advice of the Governmental Advisory Committee on public policy matters shall be duly taken into account, both in the formulation and adoption of policies. In the event that the ICANN Board determines to take an action that is not consistent with the Governmental Advisory Committee advice, it shall so inform the Committee and state the reasons why it decided not to follow that advice.    Any GAC advice approved by a full GAC consensus, understood to mean the practice of adopting decisions by general agreement in the absence of any formal objection, may only be rejected by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the Board, and the Governmental Advisory Committee and the ICANN Board will then try, in good faith and in a timely and efficient manner, to find a mutually acceptable solution.

The GAC has the autonomy to refine its Operating Procedures to specify how objections are raised and considered (for example, disallowing a single country to continue an objection on the same issue if no other countries will join in an objection).  When transmitting consensus advice to the Board for which the GAC seeks to receive special consideration, the GAC has the obligation to confirm the lack of any formal objection.



From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>> on behalf of Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>>
Date: Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 11:56 AM
To: Phil Corwin <psc at vlaw-dc.com<mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com>>, "accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>" <accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] ST18 breathrough text

Thank you Phil,

I think you are right that removing that ambiguity is consistent with our discussion earlier today. Probably the easiest fix would be to merge sentences as such

“Any GAC advice approved by a full GAC consensus, understood to mean the practice of adopting decisions by general agreement in the absence of any formal objection, may only be rejected by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the Board, and the Governmental Advisory Committee and the ICANN Board will then try, in good faith and in a timely and efficient manner, to find a mutually acceptable solution.”

Best
Mathieu

De : Phil Corwin [mailto:psc at vlaw-dc.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 26 novembre 2015 18:43
À : Mathieu Weill; accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Objet : RE: ST18 breathrough text

With all respect, I believe there was substantial consensus and no objection on the call to accepting my suggestion that the last sentence of the first paragraph be clarified to eliminate any ambiguity as to which GAC advice would require an effort to find a mutually acceptable solution, as follows:

With respect to such consensus advice, the Governmental Advisory Committee and the ICANN Board will try, in good faith and in a timely and efficient manner, to find a mutually acceptable solution.

Absent such clarification, this sentence could be read as imposing that duty in regard to any GAC advice transmitted to the Board, regardless of whether it was supported by consensus. Even with this clarification, the Board would still have to duly take into account any GAC advice, as per the first sentence.

From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mathieu Weill
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 11:09 AM
To: accountability-cross-community at icann.org<mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] TR: ST18 breathrough text

Dear Colleagues,

During the call today, we found a common way forward on the ST18 recommendation, based on joint inputs from Denmark and Keith Drazek.

This is intended to clarify the actual text that will be presented as our proposal on the Draft Report.

Thank you all of you for your contributions to this significant step forward.

Best and happy thanksgiving to all our US friends,
Mathieu

De : Steve DelBianco [mailto:sdelbianco at netchoice.org]
Envoyé : jeudi 26 novembre 2015 17:03
À : ACCT-Staff; Thomas Rickert; Mathieu Weill; León Felipe Sánchez Ambía; Cheryl Langdon-Orr; Becky Burr; Jordan Carter
Objet : ST18 breathrough text

Here’s what we need in the 3rd report:
Article XI, Section 2, Item 1

j. The advice of the Governmental Advisory Committee on public policy matters shall be duly taken into account, both in the formulation and adoption of policies. In the event that the ICANN Board determines to take an action that is not consistent with the Governmental Advisory Committee advice, it shall so inform the Committee and state the reasons why it decided not to follow that advice.    Any GAC advice approved by a full GAC consensus, understood to mean the practice of adopting decisions by general agreement in the absence of any formal objection, may only be rejected by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the Board.   With respect to such advice, the Governmental Advisory Committee and the ICANN Board will try, in good faith and in a timely and efficient manner, to find a mutually acceptable solution.

The GAC has the autonomy to refine its Operating Procedures to specify how objections are raised and considered (for example, disallowing a single country to continue an objection on the same issue if no other countries will join in an objection).  When transmitting consensus advice to the Board for which the GAC seeks to receive special consideration, the GAC has the obligation to confirm the lack of any formal objection.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151126/b2cce2df/attachment-0001.html>