[CCWG-ACCT] Your public comment re replacement of IANA provider

[Bruce Tonkin]

Hello Anne,


>>  Interestingly, the ICANN Board complied with the Panel's Order for live witnesses at the hearing.  Does this mean they actually did violate the ICANN ByLaws by doing so?  I guess it is pretty easy to see how the Board can get caught "between a rock and hard place" in certain situations.  (U.S. slang cultural reference to no good alternative).

We took the view that this was a direction of the independent panel, and that the complainant had also agreed to participate in a live hearing.    The panel was of the view that for a new gTLD applicant - this was their final recourse and that a full heavy weight court style of procedure was appropriate (although expensive for all parties).

One thing to think about though going forward is what to do if an "independent" panel doesn’t follow the updated rules of procedure for IRP proceedings.   When appointing an independent panel to make binding decisions - I think it is also important to ensure that the panel is also held accountable  to whatever rules of procedure are agreed by the community.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin