<p dir="ltr">On 7 Jan 2016 6:01 PM, "Burr, Becky" <<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Yes, but it raises an important question. If the GAC has authority to issue Advice that the Board must follow unless 2/3 of the Board reject, should the GAC ALSO get to decide whether the sole designator can challenge ICANN’s implementation of Advice in a manner that violates the Bylaws? <br>
><br>
SO: In this situation and according to the escalation process and threshold, I would expect that GAC would not get passed the petition stage unless there is indeed sense in their petition that convinces other "voting" SO/AC. No?</p>
<p dir="ltr">One extreme issue that I foresee(which has nothing to do with GAC) is a situation where the threshold required to exercise a community power is achieved, even though what is requested of the board by the community would in itself violate one or more sections of the bylaw. This is why I believe some exceptions (such as ICANN relationship with numbers as IFO) for exercising community powers were made, if there are other scenarios like that then it should be clearly exempted from wrath of the community powers.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>
<p dir="ltr">> J. Beckwith Burr <br>
> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br>
> Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / <a href="http://neustar.biz">neustar.biz</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> From: "<a href="mailto:Megan.Richards@ec.europa.eu">Megan.Richards@ec.europa.eu</a>" <<a href="mailto:Megan.Richards@ec.europa.eu">Megan.Richards@ec.europa.eu</a>><br>
> Date: Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 11:33 AM<br>
> To: "<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>" <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>><br>
> Cc: "<a href="mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org">Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org">Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org</a>>, Becky Burr <<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a>>, "<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>" <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>" <<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>>, Accountability Community <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">acct-staff@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">acct-staff@icann.org</a>><br>
><br>
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion<br>
><br>
> Sounds like a board ready to "violate" ICANN mission and core values. Were those not criteria for measures to be taken by the sole designator ?<br>
><br>
> Sent from my iPad<br>
><br>
> On 07 Jan 2016, at 17:17, Phil Corwin <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> But what if the Board cannot muster a 2/3 vote against GAC advice that goes beyond ICANN’s Mission and Core Values?<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Then we have the equivalent of a Constitutional crisis, with the GAC in a position as a member of the empowered community to object to accountability escalation attempts related to the situation.<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal<br>
>><br>
>> Virtualaw LLC<br>
>><br>
>> 1155 F Street, NW<br>
>><br>
>> Suite 1050<br>
>><br>
>> Washington, DC 20004<br>
>><br>
>> 202-559-8597/Direct<br>
>><br>
>> 202-559-8750/Fax<br>
>><br>
>> 202-255-6172/cell<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Twitter: @VlawDC<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> "Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> <a href="mailto:From%3Aaccountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">From:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Schaefer, Brett<br>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 11:08 AM<br>
>> To: Burr, Becky; Mueller, Milton L; <a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>; <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
>> Cc: <a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">acct-staff@icann.org</a><br>
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Yes, that should be clear.<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> ________________________________<br>
>><br>
>> BrettSchaefer<br>
>><br>
>> Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs<br>
>> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy<br>
>> The Heritage Foundation<br>
>> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE<br>
>> Washington, DC 20002<br>
>> 202-608-6097<br>
>> <a href="http://heritage.org">heritage.org</a><br>
>><br>
>> From: Burr, Becky [mailto:<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>] <br>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 11:06 AM<br>
>> To: Schaefer, Brett; Mueller, Milton L; <a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>; <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
>> Cc: <a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">acct-staff@icann.org</a><br>
>> Subject: Re: Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion<br>
>> Importance: High<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> IMHO, the GAC is not bound by ICANN’s Mission and Core Values. It can issue any Advice it likes. But ICANN can only implement GAC Advice in a manner that is consistent with ICANN’s Mission and Core Values. <br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> J. Beckwith Burr<br>
>> Neustar, Inc./Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
>><br>
>> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006<br>
>><br>
>> Office:+1.202.533.2932 Mobile:+1.202.352.6367 /<a href="http://neustar.biz">neustar.biz</a><br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> From: <Schaefer>, Brett <<a href="mailto:Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org">Brett.Schaefer@heritage.org</a>><br>
>> Date: Thursday, January 7, 2016 at 10:48 AM<br>
>> To: "Mueller, Milton L" <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>>, "<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>" <<a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>>, Becky Burr <<a href="mailto:becky.burr@neustar.biz">becky.burr@neustar.biz</a>>, Accountability Community <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>><br>
>> Cc: "<a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">acct-staff@icann.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">acct-staff@icann.org</a>><br>
>> Subject: RE: Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Or, perhaps, that GAC advice should not be bound by ICANN’s mission and core values?<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> ________________________________<br>
>><br>
>> BrettSchaefer<br>
>> Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs<br>
>> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy<br>
>> The Heritage Foundation<br>
>> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE<br>
>> Washington, DC 20002<br>
>> 202-608-6097<br>
>> <a href="http://heritage.org">heritage.org</a><br>
>><br>
>> <a href="mailto:From%3Aaccountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">From:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org">accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org</a>] On Behalf Of Mueller, Milton L<br>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 10:22 AM<br>
>> To: <a href="mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch">Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch</a>; <a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>; <a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a><br>
>> Cc: <a href="mailto:acct-staff@icann.org">acct-staff@icann.org</a><br>
>> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Deck for Meeting #75 Mission Statement discussion<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> Jorge:<br>
>><br>
>> Can you please clarify what the implications are of this:<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> The GAC further expects that changes to ICANN’s mission and core values should<br>
>><br>
>> not constrain the Board from accepting and implementing GAC advice. In<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> MM: Do you mean to imply that there should be no limits of ICANN’s mission?<br>
>><br>
>> <br>
>><br>
>> ________________________________<br>
>><br>
>> No virus found in this message.<br>
>> Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a><br>
>> Version: 2016.0.7227 / Virus Database: 4489/11316 - Release Date: 01/03/16<br>
>><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">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
><br>
><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">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
><br>
</p>