[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Proposed Responses to questions on Draft Bylaws

[Seun Ojedeji]

Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 7 Apr 2016 7:33 a.m., "Mathieu Weill" <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr> wrote:
>
> CCWG Response : The relevant sections of the Supplemental Report about
the GAC carve out are :
>
> Annex 1 - paragraph 8 and 44
> Board confirmation: When the Board takes action that is based on GAC
consensus advice, the Board will need to state in its resolution that its
decision was based on GAC consensus advice.
> o GAC carve-out identified in petition to use Community Power: When a
Board action that is based on GAC consensus advice is challenged, the
petitioning SO or AC will need to indicate in the initial petition that the
matter meets the requirements for the GAC carve-out and clearly identify
the applicable Board action and GAC consensus advice at issue. The decision
thresholds (as revised when the GAC carve-out is invoked in accordance in
Annex 2) required for the escalation and enforcement processes will need to
be met for the Community Power that is being exercised.
>
>
>
> Recognizing that different views exist within the CCWG about how a
petition in the EC process can be identified as based on GAC Advice (solely
based, entirely or almost entirely based, distinctively based…) and taking
into account that (a) the Board decides whether to label a decision as
based on GAC consenses advice; (b) the complaining party decides how to
frame their complaint to meet the standard in the Bylaws and (c) any
improper characterization could be subjected to an IRP, the CCWG recommends
NOT to add any additional details on that process in the Bylaws.
>

Very good response with clear rationale. my +1 to the draft response
provided by the Co-Chairs.

Regards
>
>
>
>
> De : accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] De la part de Bernard
Turcotte
> Envoyé : jeudi 7 avril 2016 00:35
> À : Accountability Cross Community
> Objet : Re: [CCWG-ACCT] CCWG - Proposed Responses to questions on Draft
Bylaws
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Please note that the document includes more than just the questions
provided by the legal counsel. Be certain to go to the bottom of the
document to see the additional questions that were included after the
questions from legal counsel.
>
>
>
> Thank You.
>
>
>
> Bernard Turcotte
>
> ICANN Staff Support
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Bernard Turcotte <
turcotte.bernard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
>
>
> Co-chairs and rapporteurs have reviewed and proposed answers to all
questions some based on the results of the Tuesday April 5th meeting of the
CCWG-Accountability.
>
>
>
> These are attached in preparation for the Thursday April 7th meeting of
the CCWG-Accountability on this topic.
>
>
>
> The CCWG-Accountability Co-chairs Mathieu, Thomas and Leon
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> 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/20160407/cb632057/attachment.html>