[CCWG-ACCT] On Stress Test 18

[Avri Doria]

On 27-Oct-15 17:13, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> Could any conceivable accountability mechanism ameliorate what you see
> as "a privilege given to no other advisory committee"?

I think so.

I have long argued that all ACs should have the same privilege.

And that the Board should be able to say no after ascertaining that the
process had taken the issue into account and decided otherwise.  And if
the issue had not been taken into account, then they needed to send it
back into the process to be properly and fully considered.

As long as the Board adheres to its rule of _never_ making policy, not
even when cloaked as implementation, the special privilege amounts to
the courtesy of being heard and of having ones issues fully considered
before acceptance or rejection of the recommendations coming from  the
Bottom Up Multistakeholder Process (BUMP).  And if they don't that is
where other escalation and enforcement comes in.

Now with the GNSO PDP models of WGs being open to everyone and all the
special early engagement work being done with the GAC, new issues not
previously considered should become more and more rare.  And if the GAC,
or any other AC, abused the privilege with too much advice on issues
that had already been dealt with or which had not been introduced into
the process at the right time, then the evaluation of the advice would
become easier and more negative.  Being a hopeful sort, I expect the
system would eventually reach a suitable balance where most issues were
considered and no one got a second or a special bite at the apple. And
reasonable appeals related to ICANN mission and core values, and its
bylaws would be properly addressed.

That is how the issue is ameliorated. Only some of this is about WS1
accountability, i.e. making sure the articles and bylaws are up to
snuff, much of it is a conversation for another time and place (WS2).  I
only meant to question the whole special privilege thing. 

The problem with stress test 18 is that it is largely not an ICANN
multistakeholder process issue, but is an intergovernmental issue.   We
are the intermediary.

avri


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus