[CCWG-ACCT] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Plenary-20171018-Jurisdiction Co-Chair Statement on way forward

Bernard Turcotte turcotte.bernard at gmail.com
Fri Oct 20 13:51:33 UTC 2017

*Co-Chair’s statement on the* *way forward for the Jurisdiction
recommendations *


The Co-Chairs have reviewed the recording, chat transcript and captioning
of the 18 October plenary as it relates to the discussion of the first
reading of the Jurisdiction draft recommendations in an effort to determine
the best way forward amongst the many opinions and requests presented at
this meeting (please note that the relevant parts of those documents have
been assembled by staff into one document attached to this email for your

First the Co-Chairs would like to again thank all participants, but
especially Ambassador Benedicto Fonseca Filho of Brazil, for the
constructive and professional nature of the discussions. These discussions
allowed everyone to understand the complexity of the issues presented by
Brazil as well as the limitations that a process such as WS2 must impose on
such work and the intrinsic impossibility of reconciling these when dealing
with concerns of such magnitude. The recommendations presented by the
Jurisdiction sub-group were arrived at in good faith and represent a clear
step forward for the community in these specific areas. This being said,
these recommendations clearly only scratch the surface of a number of very
complex issues including those presented by Brazil in their minority

In considering the best way forward for the Jurisdiction recommendations
the Co-Chairs took special note of the following from the raw captioning

·       Benedicto Fonseca Filho - We would certainly be happy to get rid of
everything related to process, anything that can be found to be
[indiscernible] or anything of that sort. We want to focus on the
substance, but to make clear that the report as such does not address key
concerns we have and that, therefore, we avail ourselves to file this
minority [indiscernible].

·       Benedicto Fonseca Filho - Thank you. I'll be very short. Actually
just to further clarify what I said before with regard to the official
deadline. I think this issue is very complex and you don't solve complex
issues in maybe one or two years, it requires a process for this because it
needs to mature, there are political realities that sometimes repeat for a
number of years.  So what I am saying, I don't think to allow one or two or
three more weeks or two months would be enough. I think that there's
something that we could maybe entertain would be to see some
[indiscernible] action and to acknowledge it's a file that needs to be
under constant scrutiny, maybe the object of standing effort on the part of
ICANN. And I think what should guide that decision that was [indiscernible]
but [indiscernible] International organization that is truly International,
not interGovernmental, but [indiscernible] stakeholder [indiscernible] new
I understand, I fully concur that [indiscernible] it's not believed that
once we [indiscernible] as to load that file. As to a third thing to be
concerned with something very limited and say this is the end of it. But
that's the emotion I would like to convey.  Thank you.

As such the Co-Chairs would propose that Brazil submit its revised minority
opinion to the plenary list by 23:59 UTC 25 October so that the members and
participants can consider it prior to the 27 October plenary.

In order to be responsive to the issues raised, we will change the format
of the face to face meeting and will be providing ample room for opinions
and positions to be expressed and put on the record. This will allow for
our group to recognize the different viewpoints and challenges that either
could not be dealt with in the report or could not be reflected in the
report to everyone’s satisfaction.

During this time slot, we will be offering Brazil the opportunity to
present its revised minority opinion to the plenary and answer questions on
it from the members and the participants.

Jurisdiction challenges have been discussed and caused controversial
debates since ICANN’s inception and we hope and expect that these
discussions will not end with the completion of work stream 2. Thus, a
record of this discussion will surely serve as a valuable source of
information to inform further discussions beyond the contents of our report.

The Co-Chairs also recommend that the second reading of the Jurisdiction
draft recommendations be conducted at the 27 October face to face meeting
as staff have confirmed that any significant delay in approving these
recommendations could endanger their inclusion in the WS2 Final Report.

This would allow for the Jurisdiction draft recommendations to be published
for public consultation soon after ICANN 60 and would allow the entire
community to comment on the recommendations as well as the minority

Although not a perfect solution we believe that this is the one which
represents the majority of views.

Bernard Turcotte for the CCWG-Accountability-WS2 Co-Chairs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20171020/af0107dc/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Plenary-20171018-AnalysisOfWayForward-JurisdictionV1.2BT.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 36009 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20171020/af0107dc/CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Plenary-20171018-AnalysisOfWayForward-JurisdictionV1.2BT-0001.pdf>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list