<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<!-- Template generated by Exclaimer Mail Disclaimers on 09:20:27 Wednesday, 4 May 2016 -->
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<style type="text/css">P.8e96fa11-c06d-4965-8817-8ff46765e27f {
MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt
}
LI.8e96fa11-c06d-4965-8817-8ff46765e27f {
MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt
}
DIV.8e96fa11-c06d-4965-8817-8ff46765e27f {
MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt
}
TABLE.8e96fa11-c06d-4965-8817-8ff46765e27fTable {
MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</style>
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<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;}
/* 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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
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]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<p class="8e96fa11-c06d-4965-8817-8ff46765e27f"></p>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Malcolm raises a fair question, but I would apply it more generally. The current bylaw stipulates that the EC can’t reject to the ICANN Budget, an IANA Budget,
an Operating Plan or a Strategic Plan except in the specified circumstances. I acknowledge that the listed criteria cover the most likely reasons for a rejection petition and the final clause (“or other matter of concern to the community”) is rather open ended.
<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">But on principle I think the EC should be able to reject those budgets and plans for any reason as long as they provide a rationale. If the rationale is weak
or caters to the concerns of a small slice of the ICANN community, it won’t receive sufficient support from the EC to pass the threshold. If it passes the EC rejection threshold, then I think that alone would demonstrates that the rationale has merit regardless
of its basis and should lead the Board to reconsider. <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>
</div>
<p></p>
<p class="8e96fa11-c06d-4965-8817-8ff46765e27f"></p>
<hr align="left" color="#58595b" width="200">
<span style="font-size:x-small; color: #004B8D; font-weight: bold; ">Brett</span><span style="font-size:x-small; color: #004B8D; font-weight: bold; "></span>
<span style="font-size:x-small; color: #004B8D; font-weight: bold; ">Schaefer</span><span style="font-size:x-small; color: #58595B; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; "><br>
Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs</span><span style="font-size:x-small; color: #58595B; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; "></span><span style="font-size:x-small; color: #58595B; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic; "><br>
Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy</span><br>
<font color="#58595b" size="2">The Heritage Foundation<br>
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE<br>
Washington, DC 20002</font><span style="font-size:x-small; color: #58595B; "><br>
202-608-6097</span><br>
<font color="#004b8d" size="2"><a style="COLOR: #004b8d; TEXT-DECORATION: none" href="http://heritage.org/">heritage.org</a><br>
<span style="font-size:x-small; "></span><span style="font-size:x-small; "></span>
<p></p>
</font>
<p></p>
<div class="WordSection1">
<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""> accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Malcolm Hutty<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, May 04, 2016 8:27 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> accountability-cross-community@icann.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [CCWG-ACCT] TR: Rationale Requirement in Annex D, Section 2.2(c)(i)(A)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
On 04/05/2016 07:43, Mathieu Weill wrote:<br>
> Dear Colleagues,<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> <br>
> As a follow up from the call yesterday, please find below a note from<br>
> our lawyers regarding one of the points we discussed. This is related to<br>
> the requirement to provide rationale when initiating a community power<br>
> escalation process.<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> *From:*Grapsas, Rebecca<br>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 03, 2016 05:24:00 PM<br>
> *To:* Gregory, Holly<br>
> *Subject:* Rationale Requirement in Annex D, Section 2.2(c)(i)(A)<br>
> <br>
> (A) the rationale upon which rejection of the Rejection Action is<br>
> sought. Where the Rejection Action Petition Notice relates to an ICANN<br>
> Budget, an IANA Budget, an Operating Plan or a Strategic Plan, the<br>
> Rejection Action Petition Notice shall not be valid and shall not be<br>
> accepted by the EC Administration unless the rationale set forth in the<br>
> Rejection Action Petition Notice is based on one or more significant<br>
> issues that were specifically raised in the applicable public comment<br>
> period(s) relating to perceived inconsistencies with the Mission,<br>
> purpose and role set forth in ICANN’s Articles of Incorporation and<br>
> Bylaws, the global public interest, the needs of ICANN’s stakeholders,<br>
> financial stability, or other matter of concern to the community;<br>
<br>
So the Empowered Community will not be able to reject the Budget,<br>
Operating Plan or Strategic Plan unless per a rationale identified in<br>
the Public Comment period for that budget/plan?<br>
<br>
What if the reason for rejecting the budget/plan is that ICANN failed to<br>
hold a public comment period?<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523<br>
Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog<br>
London Internet Exchange | <a href="http://publicaffairs.linx.net/">
http://publicaffairs.linx.net/</a><br>
<br>
London Internet Exchange Ltd<br>
Monument Place, 24 Monument Street, London EC3R 8AJ<br>
<br>
Company Registered in England No. 3137929<br>
Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA<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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p></p>
</body>
</html>