[CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on Board removal in the context of GAC advice

[Kavouss Arasteh]

2016-02-16 22:04 GMT+01:00 Schaefer, Brett <Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org>:

> Kavouss,
>
>
>
> Thank you, I did read it. It was why I raised my question in the first
> place.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Brett
>
>
>
> *From:* Kavouss Arasteh [mailto:kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 16, 2016 4:02 PM
> *To:* Schaefer, Brett
> *Cc:* Bruce Tonkin; Accountability Cross Community
> *Subject:* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Board comments on Board removal in the context
> of GAC advice
>
>
>
> Dear Brett
>
> Pls carefully read that
>
> Regards
>
> Hello All,
>
>  From Bruce$
>
>
>
> The Board has been following the work of the CCWG and appreciates the
> enormous effort over the past weeks, and especially in closing on the last
> few outstanding issues.
>
> Since the GAC Advice compromise has been reached this week, we are
> concerned over the lower threshold for Board removal reflected in
> Recommendation 2, paragraph 51, in the exceptional situation of GAC
> advice.  As the Board has previously noted, the threshold of 4 SO/ACs is an
> important safeguard to ensure full support across the ICANN community in
> the event of an entire Board recall.
>
> To mitigate the Board's concerns with this new compromise, we suggest that
> this new lower threshold only applies when BOTH of the following occurs:
>
> - The Board decides to accept GAC advice, and hence the GAC cannot
> participate in a decision to remove the Board over this decision
>
> and
>
> - An IRP raised by the community has found that the Board acted
> inconsistently with its bylaws (which includes the mission).
>
>
> This would mitigate our concern of going directly to a board removal
> process with a lower threshold.
>
>
> To outline this further, below are a few scenarios:
>
> 1.  GAC provides the Board with a consensus advice.
>
> 2.  Board accepts the advice
>
> 3.  Community believes the Board acted outside its mission in accepting
> GAC advice.
>
> 4.  Community raises an IRP.
>
> Scenario 1:
>
> 5.  IRP finds that the Board acted outside its mission in acting on the
> GAC advice.
>
> 6. Board accepts IRP finding and acts in alignment with the IRP decision
>
> 7.  Case closed.  The Community cannot exercise its power to remove the
> Board using a reduced threshold of three SOs/ACs.
>
>
> Scenario 2:
>
> 5.  IRP finds that the Board acted outside its mission in acting on the
> GAC advice.
>
> 6. Board does not accept IRP finding and does not act in alignment with
> the decision
>
> 7. The community can base its power to remove the Board on the failure to
> follow the IRP decision, and may do so with a reduced threshold of three
> SO/ACs in support and no more than one objection
>
> Scenario 3:
>
> 5. IRP finds that the Board did not act outside its mission in accepting
> the GAC advice.
>
> 6. Case closed.   The Community cannot exercise its power to remove the
> Board using a reduced threshold of three SOs/ACs.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bruce Tonkin
>
> ICANN Board Liaison to the CCWG
> ______________________________
>
>
>
> 2016-02-14 13:07 GMT+01:00 Malcolm Hutty <malcolm at linx.net>:
>
>
>
> On 14/02/2016 00:26, Bruce Tonkin wrote:
> > Hello Brett,
> >
> >
> >>>  The only change is that the EC would be required to go to an IRP
> process first before moving to spill the Board?
> >
> > That is correct, and only in the case of the GAC-carve out scenario.
>
> Bruce, Leon, Kavouss,
>
> Thank you all for your clarifications.
>
>
> Malcolm.
>
> --
>             Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
>    Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
>  London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
>
>                  London Internet Exchange Ltd
>        Monument Place, 24 Monument Street, London EC3R 8AJ
>
>          Company Registered in England No. 3137929
>        Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Brett Schaefer
> Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security
> and Foreign Policy
> The Heritage Foundation
> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> Washington, DC 20002
> 202-608-6097
> heritage.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160216/8fc88ebf/attachment.html>