<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">All</div>,</div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small">As agreed on the call today please find the new reference text for Recommendation 11 which will be discussed at the special meeting of the CCWG on Monday February 8th (12:00 UTC) and will be considered by the CCWG at its next full meeting on February 9th (12:00 UTC) to confirm, or not, if it is a consensus position of the CCWG-Accountability.</div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small">To assist you in considering the proposal you will find below a summary of the changes that are being recommended. In addition to this, and given these changes require modifications to Recommendations 1 and 2, which have been finalized, please find attached the finalized versions of Recommendations 1 and 2 with the proposed changes noted in red line. Given Recommendation 11 is not yet finalized the current draft which includes the most recent amendments (no new obligations, rationale and conformity with ICANN Bylaws)<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"> </div>is provided with the changes from 2/3rds to 60% being red lined in this version. A proposed draft text in para 22 has been added<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline"> in red line</div> to explain the changes in Recommendation 11<div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:small;display:inline">.</div></div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small">Summary of changes:</div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:14pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">1. Modify <span style="color:rgb(39,73,255)">Rec #1/Annex 1</span> and <span style="color:rgb(39,73,255)">Rec #2/Annex 2</span> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 27pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">Add the following to the end of
Paragraph 23 in <span style="color:rgb(39,73,255)">Rec #1/Annex 1</span>: </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 27pt"><i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">The GAC may not, however,
participate as a decision maker in the Empowered Community’s consideration of
the exercise a community power for the purpose of challenging or blocking the
Board’s implementation of GAC Advice. In such cases, the GAC remains free to
participate in community deliberations in an advisory capacity, but its views
will not count towards or against otherwise agreed thresholds needed to
initiate a conference call, convene a Community Forum, or exercise a specific
Community Power. This carve out preserves the ICANN Board’s unique
obligation to work with the GAC try to find a mutually acceptable solution to
implementation of GAC Advice supported by consensus (as defined in Rec. #11)
while protecting the community’s power to challenge such Board decisions.</span></i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 27pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">Modify the Table in <span style="color:rgb(39,73,255)">Rec. #2/Annex 2</span> to reflect this carve out and
add the following language to cover situations that would otherwise require the
support of four SOs or ACs:</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 27pt"><i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">(para 51) The CCWG-Accountability
also recommends that in a situation where <span style="color:rgb(39,73,255)">the
GAC may not participate as a Decisional AC because the community power is
proposed to be used to challenge the Board’s implementation of GAC Advice </span>and
the threshold is set at four in support, the power will still be validly
exercised if three are in support and no more than one objects. </span></i><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:14pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">2. Modify Recommendation 11 to reflect 60%
threshold for rejection of GAC advice by Board, with note to drafters that
supermajority requirement is not intended to create any presumption or modify
the standard applied by the Board in reviewing GAC Advice. (60% replaced
2/3rds where appropriate – added draft para 22 for consistency)</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:14pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">3. During dedicated Recommendation 11 meetings
(4 February and 8 February)</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 27pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times New Roman'">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'"> Discuss
and accept Recommendation 1 with change described above as first final reading;</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 27pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times New Roman'">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'"> Discuss
and accept Recommendation 2 with change described above as first final reading;
and</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 27pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Symbol">·<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;font-family:'Times New Roman'">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">Discuss
and accept Recommendation 11 with changes described above as first final
reading.</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 13.5pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">4. Submit the package deal to the
CCWG for <u>final consideration</u> (2</span><sup><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'">nd</span></sup><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'"> final reading) at its
conference call scheduled for 9 February, noting delicate balance requiring
compromise on all sides to reach consensus and recommending adoption “as is”
(assuming consensus on Dedicated Recommendation 11 calls). </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 14pt 48pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:'Avenir Next Regular'"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> </span><span lang="EN-US"></span></p></div></div>
</div><br></div>