<div dir="ltr"><div>Dear All,</div><div>We have had ample interpretation and ample confusions and erormous vague description that we are totally fed up and are no longer rteady to reopen any thing</div><div>We wish to prepare ourselves for Marrakesh. </div><div>Let us stop this inconclusiove argument, unnecessary interprétations </div><div>We need to reflect on what has been acheived.</div><div>Regards</div><div>Kavouss </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-02-23 21:28 GMT+01:00 Phil Corwin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com" target="_blank">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" vlink="purple" link="blue">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">Thanks Becky, Jordan, and Greg (and several others who have contacted me off list to communicate their agreement with my interpretation).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">Let me be clear – I find the prospect of collective Board removal to be abhorrent. If we ever came to the point that the broad ICANN community was so disaffected with Board actions and decisions as to contemplate
such action it would be symptomatic of deep institutional dysfunction and dissent, and exercise of the power might just as well result in the end of ICANN as save it.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)">Nonetheless, it is an arrow that much be in our quiver of community powers. My point in the dissection of amended section 72 is that, even after the removal of the “corner case” language, the community still
has the option of removal of many or all Board members, so long as each removal is effectuated one at a time via community powers 4a or 4b.<u></u><u></u></span></p><span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Virtualaw LLC</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">1155 F Street, NW</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Suite 1050</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Washington, DC 20004</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><a href="tel:202-559-8597" target="_blank" value="+12025598597">202-559-8597</a>/Direct</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><a href="tel:202-559-8750" target="_blank" value="+12025598750">202-559-8750</a>/Fax</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><a href="tel:202-255-6172" target="_blank" value="+12022556172">202-255-6172</a>/cell</span></b><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";font-size:12pt"><u></u><u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Twitter: @VlawDC</span></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";font-size:12pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey</span></i></b><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:rgb(31,73,125)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</span><div>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentColor currentColor;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">From:</span></b><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"> Burr, Becky [mailto:<a href="mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz" target="_blank">Becky.Burr@neustar.biz</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 23, 2016 3:05 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Phil Corwin; Accountability Cross Community<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] Understanding of Amended Paragraph 72 of Annex 2<br>
<b>Importance:</b> High<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt">Phil, <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt">I believe this is correct. As I said, phrase (2) deals with a corner case.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt">Becky<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:12pt"><b><span style="color:black;font-size:9pt">J. Beckwith Burr</span></b><b><span style="color:rgb(38,38,38);font-size:10pt">
</span></b><b><span style="color:rgb(51,102,255);font-size:9pt"><br>
</span></b><b><span style="color:rgb(0,134,86);font-size:9pt">Neustar, Inc.</span></b><b><span style="color:rgb(6,134,88);font-size:9pt">
</span></b><span style="color:rgb(125,125,125);font-size:9pt">/</span><b><span style="color:rgb(6,134,88);font-size:9pt">
</span></b><span style="color:rgb(125,125,125);font-size:9pt">Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer<br>
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006</span><span style="color:gray;font-size:9pt"><br>
</span><b><span style="color:rgb(0,134,86);font-size:9pt">Office:</span></b><b><span style="color:rgb(125,125,125);font-size:9pt">
</span></b><span style="color:rgb(125,125,125);font-size:9pt"><a href="tel:%2B1.202.533.2932" target="_blank" value="+12025332932">+1.202.533.2932</a> </span><b><span style="color:rgb(0,134,86);font-size:9pt">Mobile:</span></b><b><span style="color:rgb(125,125,125);font-size:9pt">
</span></b><span style="color:rgb(125,125,125);font-size:9pt"><a href="tel:%2B1.202.352.6367" target="_blank" value="+12023526367">+1.202.352.6367</a> </span><strong><span style="color:rgb(125,125,125);font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-size:9pt">/</span></strong><span style="color:rgb(6,134,88);font-size:9pt">
</span><span style="color:black"><a href="http://www.neustar.biz" target="_blank"><b><span style="color:rgb(0,134,86);font-size:9pt">neustar.biz</span></b></a></span><span style="color:black;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";font-size:12pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentColor currentColor;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">From: </span></b><span style="color:black">Phil Corwin <<a href="mailto:psc@vlaw-dc.com" target="_blank">psc@vlaw-dc.com</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, February 23, 2016 at 2:24 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>Accountability Community <<a href="mailto:accountability-cross-community@icann.org" target="_blank">accountability-cross-community@icann.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[CCWG-ACCT] Understanding of Amended Paragraph 72 of Annex 2<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Now that the Co-Chairs have just issued their decision on how to proceed, I want to return to a subject that I first raised in the chat room on the call held twelve hours ago.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="color:black">Section 72 of Annex 2 will now read
</span><span style="color:red">[bracketed text in red to be deleted]</span><span style="color:black">:</span></u><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> The CCWG-Accountability also recommends that in a situation where the GAC may not
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in"><span style="color:black">participate as a Decisional Participant because the Community Power is proposed to be used to
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in"><span style="color:black">challenge the Board’s implementation of GAC consensus advice and the threshold is set at four
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in"><span style="color:black">in support, the power will still be validly exercised if three are in support and no more than one
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in"><span style="color:black">objects, with the following exception:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p style="margin-left:1in">
<u></u><span style="color:black;font-family:Symbol"><span>·<span style="font:7pt/normal "Times New Roman";font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Where the power to be exercised is recalling the entire Board for implementing GAC
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin-left:0.25in"><span style="color:black">advice, the reduced threshold would apply only
</span><span style="color:red">[either (1)] </span><span style="color:black">after an IRP has found that, in
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin-left:0.25in"><span style="color:black">implementing GAC advice, the Board acted inconsistently with the ICANN Bylaws</span><span style="color:red">[, or (2) if
</span><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin-left:0.25in"><span style="color:red">the IRP is not available to challenge the Board action in question]</span><span style="color:black">. If the Empowered
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin-left:0.25in"><span style="color:black">Community has brought such an IRP and does not prevail, the Empowered Community
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin-left:0.25in"><span style="color:black">may not exercise its power to recall the entire the Board solely on the basis of the matter
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:0.5in;margin-left:0.25in"><span style="color:black">decided by the IRP. It may, however, exercise that power based on other grounds.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">As I read the remaining text, the first paragraph establishes the general principle that in any situation where the Empowered Community proposes to challenge the Board’s implementation of GAC consensus advice,
using any of the available community powers, the GAC would be barred from being a decisional participant, and that where the threshold for taking action is four SO/Ac votes it would drop to three.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="color:black">I would note in passing that the voting threshold for exercise of a community power is set at four (per items 46-70) for only three community powers:</span></u><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u><span style="color:black"><span>1.<span style="font:7pt/normal "Times New Roman";font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Reject a proposed Operating Plan/Strategic Plan/Budget<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u><span style="color:black"><span>2.<span style="font:7pt/normal "Times New Roman";font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
</span></span></span><u></u><b><span style="color:black">Recall the entire Board of Directors</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><u></u><span style="color:black"><span>3.<span style="font:7pt/normal "Times New Roman";font-size-adjust:none;font-stretch:normal">
</span></span></span><u></u><span style="color:black">Reject an ICANN Board decision relating to reviews of IANA functions, including the triggering of any PTI separation process<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Paragraph 2 then goes on to create an exception for that reduced threshold situation -- applicable only to removal of the Board in its entirety, and not to rejection of an operating plan/budget or a review of
IANA functions where the Board has acted pursuant to GAC consensus advice. For Board removal in its entirety the EC would first be required to pursue an IRP – and if the IRP determined that the Board implementation of GAC consensus advice had not violated
the Bylaws the reduced voting threshold would not apply, and the matter could not be further pursued unless there were other, non-Bylaws grounds for pursuing it. In the latter instance (non-Bylaws ground), the threshold for full Board removal would be four
votes (unanimity of all SOs and ACs other than the GAC, which would remain non-decisional).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="color:black">Are we agreed on that view so far?</span></u><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Now here is where it gets interesting, in regard to matters of Board implementation of GAC consensus advice about which the community was aggrieved, and regardless of whether such implementation involved an alleged
Bylaws violation and was therefore subject to an IRP ---<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">If the community sought to exercise power 4a contained at section 55 – “Remove an individual Board Director nominated by an SO or AC (and appointed by the Empowered Community)” – none of the above in para 72 would
be relevant because the majority of the nominating SO/AC could do that on its own by an internal 3Ž4 majority vote after inviting and considering comments from all SOs/ACs (noting that it’s not entirely clear whether the GAC would be barred from commenting,
although it’s of little relevance since the electing SO/AC is in no way bound by the opinions of the others). That removal could include the Chairman of the Board if he/she was the nominee of a particular SO or AC.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">If the community sought to exercise power 4b contained at section 58 – “Remove an individual Board Director nominated by the Nominating Committee (and appointed by the Empowered Community)” – the lowered threshold
requirement in para 72 would not be relevant because the required threshold support is “Three support, and no more than one objection”, and the GAC would be barred as a decisional participant if the challenge pertained to the Board member voting to implement
GAC consensus advice. Again, this power is available to remove the Chair if he/she was a NomCom appointee (Note: I have checked the ICANN Bylaws and any Board member other the President/CEO, regardless of how they were placed on the Board, can be elected to
the Chair or Vice Chair position).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">Putting this all together, even after the CCWG’s Co-Chairs decision to proceed with striking clause 2 of the second paragraph of section 72, the Empowered Community could still remove the Board Chairman and
Vice Chair (and <u>sequentially chosen</u> replacement Chairs and Vice Chairs, if they failed to lead the Board to reverse its decision implementing GAC advice), and could remove
<u>one or more additional members of the Board</u>, whether placed on the Board by an SO/AC or by the NomCom,
<u>so long as such actions were taken individually and not collectively</u>. And the community, if the aggrieved view was sufficiently widespread, could collectively remove (and then replace) sufficient numbers of Board members to compel a reversal of the implementation
of GAC consensus advice. Indeed, there is no limitation placed on the number of Board members who may be removed via community powers 4a and 4b so long as each is a discrete assertion of those powers pertaining to a particular Board member.</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black"> </span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">If I am correct on this interpretation then, the removal of clause 2 may not be all that significant.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black">If anyone believes that my interpretation of any or all of this is incorrect – especially Board or GAC members – I would urge them to voice disagreement now. I would also welcome expressions of support for this
interpretation.</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:black"> </span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">If you have read this far, thanks.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Best to all, Philip<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Philip S. Corwin, Founding Principal</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Virtualaw LLC</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">1155 F Street, NW</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Suite 1050</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Washington, DC 20004</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><a href="tel:202-559-8597" target="_blank" value="+12025598597">202-559-8597</a>/Direct</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><a href="tel:202-559-8750" target="_blank" value="+12025598750">202-559-8750</a>/Fax</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><a href="tel:202-255-6172" target="_blank" value="+12022556172">202-255-6172</a>/cell</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"> </span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Twitter: @VlawDC</span></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"> </span><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="color:navy;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">"Luck is the residue of design" -- Branch Rickey</span></i></b><span style="color:black"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt">
<hr width="100%" size="1" align="center" style="color:rgb(160,160,160)" noshade>
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black;font-size:10.5pt">No virus found in this message.<br>
Checked by AVG - <a href="http://www.avg.com" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a><br>
Version: 2016.0.7303 / Virus Database: 4533/11679 - Release Date: 02/22/16<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</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" rel="noreferrer">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>