<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>There are several differences between the GAC and the SOs.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Advisory Committees render advice as the name implies. And ACs have a defined area and a defined role.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">SOs have a different role, but still restrict themselves on policy development only pertaining to their area, with involvement of the other SO/ACs.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">So Phil is right. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">And as long as the GAC thinks it can issue policy advice on anything including who to give a gTLD to, and requiring supermajority of the Board to unbind, this can not be allowed to happen.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Though I agree that other AC's in particular the ALAC must be given even less weight. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">el<br>-- <div>Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini</div></div><div><br>On 10 Nov 2015, at 01:23, Phil Corwin <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Segoe UI";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 56.7pt 70.85pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The GAC has been “singled out” in these accountability discussions because it is the only AC whose (consensus) advice, under the current Bylaws, is required
to be given any special consideration by the Board in a quest for a “mutually acceptable solution”. That is not based on any mistrust of the GAC but on the reality that the Bylaws already makes that distinction, which in turn is a recognition that governments
have a special role and responsibilities in regard to public policy matters. <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">As for the rationale that the proposed Bylaws amendment “would place the GAC in equal terms with proposals submitted by GNSO and ccNSO supported by supermajorities
in those supporting organizations”, Board consideration of GNSO recommendations is governed by Section 9 of Annex A of the Bylaws (“</span><span lang="EN" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Any PDP Recommendations approved
by a GNSO Supermajority Vote shall be adopted by the Board unless, by a vote of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the Board, the Board determines that such policy is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN. If the GNSO Council recommendation
was approved by less than a GNSO Supermajority Vote, a majority vote of the Board will be sufficient to determine that such policy is not in the best interests of the ICANN community or ICANN.”, with additional provisions regarding a process to reach agreement
if possible ) and of ccNSO recommendations by Section 15 of Annex B (“The Board shall adopt the ccNSO Recommendation unless by a vote of more than 66% the Board determines that such policy is not in the best interest of the ICANN community or of ICANN”, with
similar additional provisions).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">However, the notion that the GAC should be placed on “equal terms” with these two supporting organizations proposes a fundamental transformation of
its role within ICANN, and would elevate it from an entity that renders policy advice to one that prescribes policy. I do not support such a transformation of its role, I strongly question whether a significant portion much less a majority of the CCWG supports
such a fundamental change, and I believe that its adoption would likely make it impossible for the NTIA or US Congress to go along with any accountability proposal that contained it.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Virtualaw LLC</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">1155 F Street, NW</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Suite 1050</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Washington, DC 20004</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">202-559-8597/Direct</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">202-559-8750/Fax</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">202-255-6172/cell</span></b><b><span style="color:navy"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">Twitter: @VlawDC</span></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:navy">"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey</span></i></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Paul Rosenzweig<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, November 09, 2015 4:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>; <a href="mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org">sdelbianco@netchoice.org</a>; <a href="mailto:pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br">pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br</a>; <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Stress Test 18: bylaw amendment suggestion<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">A quick question Jorge. You write: “I feel it was also considered important, within the GAC, to spell this principle in horizontal terms, applicable to all
advisory committees in such a situation, and not to single out the GAC as this could be perceived as a sign of mistrust.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Surely, though, you (and the members of the GAC) are not really saying that you stand in the same relationship to ICANN and/or the citizens of the world as
the SSAC or the RSSAC or even the ALAC? I fully agree that like should be treated alike – but the degree of power, influence, authority and capacity of the GAC members outside of the ICANN context is so fundamentally different from the other ACs that the
difference in capabilities should be reflected in a difference in treatment. It isn’t a sign of “mistrust” I think, so much as a reflection of the reality that the governments present in the GAC are very much different entities than the individuals and institutions
represented on, say, the SSAC. Just the fact that they are all “advisory committees” by itself isn’t really saying that much. Is there something more to your view than this facial equivalence?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Paul<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Paul Rosenzweig<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="mailto:paul.rosenzweigesq@redbranchconsulting.com"><span style="color:#0563C1">paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com</span></a>
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">O: +1 (202) 547-0660<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">M: +1 (202) 329-9650<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Skype: paul.rosenzweig1066<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=9"><span style="color:#0563C1">Link
to my PGP Key</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a> [<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, November 9, 2015 2:51 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org">sdelbianco@netchoice.org</a>;
<a href="mailto:pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br">pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br</a>; <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">
accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Stress Test 18: bylaw amendment suggestion<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Dear Pedro, dear Steve, dear all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">First of all, let me thank Pedro for trying to „operationalize“ the elements of what was a consensus GAC input from the GAC agreed upon in Dublin.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I would like to share some thoughts with all of you which were important elements of the discussion within the GAC and which perhaps may help to forge a common
understanding of the ccwg on this very delicate issue.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">First, there may be some degree of understanding that we want to avoid placing the ICANN Board in a position where it would be obliged to arbitrate between
divergent views or interests of parts of an advisory committee, which in the case of the GAC would be sovereign governments. This thought could be considered as a relevant element in supporting an express mention of the consensus support requirement, whenever
the Board has to enter into a mutually accepted procedure with an advisory committee.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I feel it was also considered important, within the GAC, to spell this principle in horizontal terms, applicable to all advisory committees in such a situation,
and not to single out the GAC as this could be perceived as a sign of mistrust.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">On the other hand, it was also considered as important that provision should be made that Advisory Committees should retain a certain degree of autonomy in
establishing their particular definition of consensus. As we know, there is no “one size fits all” definition of consensus and some flexibility must be provided to adapt to the different circumstances and characteristics of each Advisory Committee. In any
case, I feel it is understood that whatever specific definition of consensus is adopted, majority voting is ruled out by definition to mean “consensus”.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">At the same time, we also know that consensus does not mean unanimity and should not be construed as allowing a single or absolutely negligible minority within
an Advisory Committee to recklessly block a consensus advice as this would amount to a risk of capture of the named Advisory Committee, and would prevent it from properly exercising its advisory role.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">In what specifically affects the GAC, and mindful of the ATRT2 report and the recommendations of the Board-GAC Recommendation Implementation Working Group,
the GAC also discussed and agreed to consider it as another important element in the equation, that a 2/3 majority vote would need to be required from the Board to turn down a consensus GAC advice on public policy matters.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">In my view, this would guarantee a thoughtful consideration by the Board of public policy advice supported by GAC consensus within the new framework, bearing
in mind that the special historical role of the US on these matters will be missing, and advice from the GAC in my opinion amounts or should amount to a significant element of the multistakeholder model.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">In addition, this would place the GAC in equal terms with proposals submitted by GNSO and ccNSO supported by supermajorities in those supporting organizations.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I hope these personal thoughts are helpful for progressing in this very delicate discussion<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Best regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Jorge
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></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="DE" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Von:</span></b><span lang="DE" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>]
<b>Im Auftrag von </b>Steve DelBianco<br>
<b>Gesendet:</b> Montag, 9. November 2015 15:49<br>
<b>An:</b> Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva <<a href="mailto:pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br">pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br</a>>;
<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Stress Test 18: bylaw amendment suggestion<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Thank-you Pedro for picking-up this discussion after Dublin.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Speaking only for myself, I am optimistic that CCWG might agree to apply the same condition for advice from
<u>all</u> Advisory Committees. What about a general Advisory Committee amendment along these lines, without singling-out the GAC?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-left:30.0pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">For any Advisory Committee where the Board is required to seek a mutually acceptable solution if the Board does not follow that Committee’s advice, the Board should
not be required to arbitrate among divergent views within that Committee. Therefore, the Board shall have no obligation to seek a mutually acceptable solution for Advisory Committee advice that was not supported by consensus among Committee members. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Second, regarding your additional request to require more than 2/3 majority vote for the board to reject GAC advice. That has not been discussed in the CCWG, and
would be regarded as a bid to enhance the weight of GAC’s advice. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">I believe that a new +2/3 rule would have to be balanced — by a requirement that any such GAC advice was adopted in the absence of any formal objection. As you know,
this is the GAC’s present rule for decision-making, so this does not impose any change on the GAC.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Finally, we’re interested to know the GAC’s reaction to the rationale we provided for Stress Test 18 in Dublin. I’ve attached revised text for ST 18 that reflects
the updated rationale, as approved by Stress Test working party (before Dublin) This text makes no mention of government ‘capture’ and removes the offending language (with my apologies, once again). <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Am looking forward to seeing you at IGF and welcome additional exchanges of ideas there.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Steve<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">From:
</span></b><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>> on behalf of Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva <<a href="mailto:pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br">pedro.ivo@itamaraty.gov.br</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:28 AM<br>
<b>To: </b>"<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[CCWG-ACCT] Stress Test 18: bylaw amendment suggestion<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black">Dear CCWG colleagues,
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">As you are aware, in Dublin the GAC has provided a consensus input with regards to the bylaw amendments derived from ST18. The GAC input was the following:</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">"<i>The discussions on Stress Test 18 have helped the GAC to have a better understanding of the different views on the issue. In assessing the different rationales presented so far
related to Stress Test 18, the GAC considered: </i></span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:black">·</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">The need that each and every Advisory Committee ensures that the advice provided is clear and reflects the consensus view of the Committee;
</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:Symbol;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:black">·</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">The need that each and every Advisory Committee should preserve its own autonomy in its definition of consensus;
</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:Symbol;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:black">·</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">The value the Board attributes to receiving consensus advice;
</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:Symbol;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:black">·</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">The recommendation of the BGRI WG, as reiterated by the ATRT2, to set the threshold
</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:Symbol;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"><i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">for the ICANN Board to reject GAC advice to a 2/3 majority voting, consistent with the threshold established for rejection of ccNSO and GNSO PDP recommendations.</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:Symbol;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p><i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">In view of the above, having considered concerns expressed by various parties, the GAC agreed to further work on the issue of Stress Test 18, and to submit any further input to
the CCWG taking into account the timelines of the CCWG. GAC Members will continue to work within the CCWG to finalise the proposal for enhancing ICANN accountability.</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">" </span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">With the aim of addressing the input given by the GAC in its ICANN 54 communiqué and the original concerns expressed by the ST18 proponents, I present for your
consideration the following alternative amendments (<b><u>underlined</u></b>) in ICANN bylaws. </span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">ARTICLE XI: ADVISORY COMMITTEES</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom:23.3pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Section 1. GENERAL</span></i></b><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom:23.3pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">“The Board may create one or more Advisory Committees in addition to those set forth in this Article. Advisory Committee membership may consist of Directors
only, Directors and non-directors, or non-directors only, and may also include non-voting or alternate members. Advisory Committees shall have no legal authority to act for ICANN, but shall report their findings and recommendations to the Board.</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><u><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Where the ICANN Board is obliged to pay due deference to advice from Advisory Committees and where that advice, if not followed, requires finding mutually
agreed solutions for implementation of that advice, the Advisory Committee will make every effort to ensure that the advice provided is clear and reflects the consensus view of the committee. In this context, each Advisory Committee has the right to determine
its particular definition of consensus.</span></u></i></b><i><u><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">” </span></u></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black"> </span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">ARTICLE XI: ADVISORY COMMITTEES</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Section 2. SPECIFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEES</span></i></b><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Item 1.j</span></i></b><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">“The advice of the Governmental Advisory Committee on public policy matters shall be duly taken into account, both in the formulation and adoption of policies.
In the event that the ICANN Board determines to take an action that is not consistent with the Governmental Advisory Committee advice, it shall so inform the Committee and state the reasons why it decided not to follow that advice. <b><u>Any GAC Advice approved
by a GAC consensus may only be rejected by a vote of more than two-thirds (2/3) of the Board.</u></b> The Governmental Advisory Committee and the ICANN Board will then try, in good faith and in a timely and efficient manner, to find a mutually acceptable solution.”</span></i><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Kind regards,</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Pedro Ivo Ferraz da Silva</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Divisão da Sociedade da Informação</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">Ministério das Relações Exteriores</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:black">T: +55 61 2030-6609</span><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Segoe UI","sans-serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center">
<hr size="1" width="100%" noshade="" style="color:#A0A0A0" align="center">
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto">No virus found in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a><br>
Version: 2015.0.6140 / Virus Database: 4450/10889 - Release Date: 10/25/15<br>
Internal Virus Database is out of date.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org">Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>