[CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)

Mon Jan 18 16:52:25 UTC 2016

Dear All,
Rationale is a general term
Could someone kindly describe what does it mean or what is its scope of
application in the context of ICANN by providing some practical example
See also below
Tom Dale
[image: Pièces jointes]09:57 (Il y a 7 heures)
À *Finn*, *Mark*, *Olga*, *Jorge.Cancio*, *Julia*, *Sabine.Meyer*, *Pedro*,
*Suzanne*, *Alice*, *Pär*, *gac*, moi
Dear All

In any discussion of Advisory Committees (including GAC) providing a
rationale for their advice, you may wish to note  the GAC report to the
Board of 8 May 2015 (here
<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/schneider-to-crocker-08may15-en.pdf>)
in which the following response to a relevant ATRT2 Recommendation was
provided:

*ATRT2 Recommendation 6.3.        *ATRT2 recommends that the Board work
jointly with the GAC, through the BGRI, to facilitate the GAC developing
and publishing rationales for GAC Advice at the time Advice is provided.
Such rationales should be recorded in the GAC register. The register should
also include a record of how the ICANN Board responded to each item of
advice.

*GAC Response*: Being Implemented. The rationale for GAC advice in
Communiqués has been made clearer through continuous improvement of the
wording of the Communiqué itself, including attachments where appropriate;
holding of open meeting sessions as the default; and publication of
transcripts and Minutes.

The rationale for other GAC advice in the form of inter-sessional
correspondence is made as clear as possible in the correspondence itself.

The GAC Register of Advice could be made clearer and more accessible and
this is being addressed.

GAC Open Forums at face-to-face meetings are an opportunity for the
community to seek further clarification from GAC on processes.

The GAC will:

·       Continue working with ICANN staff to improve the GAC Register of
Advice, including a record of how the ICANN Board responded to each item of
advice.

·       Ensure that the GAC website review addresses the intent of this
recommendation.

·       Consider further options for explaining its advice at face-to-face
meetings and in writing.

Regards

Tom Dale

ACIG GAC Secretariat

2016-01-18 17:17 GMT+01:00 Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco at netchoice.org>:

> Mathieu —  Regarding formal advice from any Advisory Committee (AC), many
> commenters reiterated that a rationale should be a *requirement* for
> advice to be considered by the board.   (BC, NPOC, Google, USCIB, RySG,
> Valideus, the US Chamber, RrSG, NCUC, I2C, Intel, IPC)
>
> It’s not enough to require that each AC "will make every effort”.
>
>
>
>
> From: <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of
> Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
> Date: Monday, January 18, 2016 at 3:10 AM
> To: Greg Shatan <gregshatanipc at gmail.com>, Mike Chartier <
> mike.s.chartier at intel.com>
> Cc: "accountability-cross-community at icann.org" <
> accountability-cross-community at icann.org>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>
> Mike,
>
>
>
> Good catch indeed. Precisely the point of our first reading exercise.
>
>
>
> So we will add this to recommendation 11 agenda item tomorrow.
>
>
>
> I will note that the current annex includes a related recommendation :
>
> ·         Insert a mention for all ACs: “The AC will make every effort to
> ensure that the advice provided is clear and supported by a rationale.”
>
> Best,
>
> Mathieu
>
>
>
> *De :* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [
> mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] *De la part de* Greg
> Shatan
> *Envoyé :* lundi 18 janvier 2016 05:30
> *À :* Chartier, Mike S
> *Cc :* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Objet :* Re: [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>
>
>
> Mike,
>
>
>
> Good point and good catch.  This should not have been overlooked.
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Chartier, Mike S <
> mike.s.chartier at intel.com> wrote:
>
> I think this is another illustration of how we need to be careful in
> documenting the process for handling comments (other than the Boards). For
> Recommendation 11 several commenters offered the proposal to add a
> requirement for GAC advice to be accompanied by a rationale. Given the
> general acceptance of proposals for rationales in other areas, I would have
> thought it would have at least been given a note in the prep document.
>
> Look forward to discussing on Tues.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:
> accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Alice
> Jansen
> *Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2016 12:01 PM
> *To:* accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> *Subject:* [CCWG-ACCT] DOCUMENT - Rec 11 - GAC Advice (first reading)
>
>
>
> *Sent on behalf of CCWG-ACCT Co-Chairs*
>
>
>
> In preparation for your R*ecommendation 11 – GAC Advice (first reading)* discussion
> scheduled for your call #78 - Tuesday, 19 January 2016 (12:00 – 15:00
> UTC) - please find attached the material to review.
>
> Please use this email thread to circulate any comments you may have in
> advance of the call.
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
> Mathieu, Thomas, León
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160118/f4012e2f/attachment.html>