<div dir="ltr">Dear All,<div><br></div><div style="text-align:justify"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">I agree with Chris that discussing this issues independently from each other, and under the fixed present structure between Staff and Board is not going to be either easy nor helpful. </font></div><div style="text-align:justify"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="text-align:justify"><br></span></font></div><div style="text-align:justify"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="text-align:justify">The tacit assumption that the corporate structure is fixed and/or given, not only limits the scope of its accountability exercise, but also the transparency and the understating of its internal processes by external actors. As changes in the bylaws are being considered for the stewardship transition, some structural bottlenecks could also be reviewed and reduced and/or eliminated. A clearer corporate structure and the layered approach Chris is suggesting (entry level, next higher level, etc. and independence from whom (from Staff, from Board, All of ICANN) should be the way to look for guarantees of stronger </span><b style="text-align:justify">internal</b><span style="text-align:justify"> checks and balances. The we can go to external ones.</span></font></div><div style="text-align:justify"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="text-align:justify"><br></span></font></div><div style="text-align:justify"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Both ICANNs present corporate governance structure, as well as the present implementation of its (MS) representation model, should be carefully analysed at different levels or layers of responsibility and interests, as a framework for analysing present and future reconsideration and redress mechanisms.<span style="text-align:justify"><br></span></font></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature">Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez<br>ISOC Costa Rica Chapter<br>skype carlos.raulg<br>+506 8837 7176 (New Phone number!!!!)<br>________<br>Apartado 1571-1000<br>COSTA RICA</div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-03-08 21:58 GMT-06:00 Chris LaHatte <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:chris.lahatte@icann.org" target="_blank">chris.lahatte@icann.org</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="white" lang="EN-NZ" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d">This discussion and the independent review panel discussions are useful but I am concerned that there is a more fundamental issue. There needs to be a full assessment of what can go to reconsideration, and what should go to an independent review panel. If we are looking at issues of accountability in the context of dispute resolution procedures, then we need to take a systematic approach.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d">The 1<sup>st</sup> issue is the entry level for disputes. Are we trying to tweak the existing systems, which have well-recognised deficiencies, or are we trying to provide a better dispute resolution system? If this is the case, then we need to think about criteria for entry into such a system, with structure and procedure to enable the disputes to be handled with appropriate standards of procedural fairness. There are issues for example with reconsideration where as the ombudsman I have received complaints about a conflict of interest between different committees of the board resulting in a decision being heard by the board governance committee for reconsideration decisions, where the complainant has said that the conflicts of interest are fatal to a fair procedure. I immediately note that this is not the view of at least some members of the board, but perception of bias is a critical issue and designing a system, and should be avoided.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d">Similar issues arise with the IRP. There is discussion about how this operates and members of the panel to be selected. There are mature appointment systems with a number of organisations such as ICC and WIPO, and rather than have panels selected by the community, again what some possible connection causing a problem of perception of bias, it would be very easy to tap into those resources to appoint experienced panellists.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d">Again, the entry level requirements for IRP need to be carefully considered once the reconsideration process has been properly discussed. Are we talking about a more wide-ranging process for deciding disputes? Or is this just the narrow existing process, which we want to work better?<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d">Just some discussion points.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d">Chris LaHatte<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d">Ombudsman<u></u><u></u></span></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Garamond",serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:windowtext"> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Avri Doria<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 09, 2015 4:18 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Reconsideration Sub-Group of the CCWG Work Party 2 Review and Redress<u></u><u></u></span></p></div></div><div><div class="h5"><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Hi,<br><br>Does there need to be reconsideration based on a claim that staff action contravenes PDP developed policy?<br><br>Or was that contained in one of the included issues already?<br><br>avri<br><br><u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On 08-Mar-15 18:19, Robin Gross wrote:<u></u><u></u></p></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Hello,</span><u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">This email is to kick-off the discussion for the </span><span><span style="font-size:18.0pt">Reconsideration Sub-Group of the CCWG Work Party 2 Review and Redress Mechanisms.</span></span><u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Volunteers so far: Robin Gross, Ed Morris, Chris LaHatte, David McAuley, Carlos Gutierrez (please send a note to <<a href="mailto:alice.jansen@icann.org" target="_blank">alice.jansen@icann.org</a>> to volunteer for this sub-group).</span><u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span><span style="font-size:18.0pt">This WP2 sub-group should will look specifically at issues to be addressed with respect to improving ICANN's accountability mechanisms involving a reconsideration process of a board or management decision.</span></span><u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span><span style="font-size:18.0pt">Specific Task: To review the current rules under which reconsideration occurs, and to propose appropriate changes to those rules to create adequate accountability. </span></span><u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Existing "Reconsideration Request" accountability mechanism:</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">See ICANN Bylaws Art. IV, Sec. 2) Board reconsideration of:</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:29.0pt;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">- One or more staff actions or inactions that contradict established ICANN policy(ies); or</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:29.0pt;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">- One or more actions or inactions of the ICANN Board that have been taken or refused to be taken without consideration of material information, except where the party submitting the request could have submitted, but did not submit, the information for the Board's consideration at the time of action or refusal to act; or</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"> - One or more actions or inactions of the ICANN Board that are taken as a result of the Board's reliance on false or inaccurate material information. </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">-----------------------------------------------------------------------</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Suggestions for Change/Enhancement ICANN's Reconsideration Processes:</span></b><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">1.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Mechanism for review of Board or management action in conflict with ICANN Bylaws or Articles of Incorporation.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">2.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Mechanism to require community (members, AC/SOs, etc.) to require Board to act on, implement, amend, accelerate implementation of, a previously approved ATRT recommendation.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">3.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Change bylaws for Reconsideration Process: trigger when board acts arbitrarily or capriciously; decisions subject to Independent Review.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">4.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Reconsideration of staff action/inaction.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">5.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Broadly expand grounds on which ICANN decisions and operations can be challenged; lower threshold to succeed in a challenge.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">6. Reasonable time deadlines and other due process considerations.</span><u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">What else?<u></u><u></u></p></div><p style="margin-left:.25in"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">------------------</span><u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Proposal to address implementation and operational issues including:</span></b><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:18.5pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">·</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Standing</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:18.5pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">·</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Standard of review</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:18.5pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">·</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Composition</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:18.5pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">·</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Selection</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:18.5pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">·</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Decision-making</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:18.5pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">·</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt"> </span><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Accessibility</span><u></u><u></u></p><p style="margin-left:18.5pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"> * Implementation</span><u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"> * Due process</span><u></u><u></u></p></div></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Work Party 2 Reconsideration mailing list – <a href="mailto:wp2-reconsideration@icann.org" target="_blank">wp2-reconsideration@icann.org</a> – is now active.<u></u><u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Public archives may be found at: <a href="http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp2-reconsideration/" target="_blank">http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp2-reconsideration/</a><u></u><u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">May this sub-group please have a wiki page? Thank you.<u></u><u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Please volunteer for this sub-group - especially if you have any experience with ICANN's reconsideration process.<u></u><u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Thanks,<u></u><u></u></span></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Robin<u></u><u></u></span></p></div></div><p style="margin-left:.25in"><u></u> <u></u></p><p style="margin-left:.25in;text-autospace:none"><u></u> <u></u></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><br><br><br><u></u><u></u></p><pre>_______________________________________________<u></u><u></u></pre><pre>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<u></u><u></u></pre><pre><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org" target="_blank">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><u></u><u></u></pre><pre><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><u></u><u></u></pre></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br><br><u></u><u></u></p><div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><hr size="1" width="99%" noshade style="color:#909090" align="center"></div><table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse"><tbody><tr><td style="padding:0in 11.25pt 0in 6.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://www.avast.com/" target="_blank"><span style="text-decoration:none"><img border="0" src="http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png"></span></a><u></u><u></u></p></td><td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt"><p><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3d4d5a">This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. <br><a href="http://www.avast.com/" target="_blank">www.avast.com</a> <u></u><u></u></span></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div></div></div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>