[AT-Review] post-scriptum

[Fabio Colasanti]

Dear all,

A post-scriptum to the message I have just sent to better express my concerns on the first recommendation of section 4.

First.  We are the "Accountability and Transparency" Review Team.  Behind the niceties of the AoC language, the community certainly expects us to make substantial recommendations on the accountability and transparency aspects of the current arrangements/mechanisms of ICANN.

Second.  The language of the AoC calls on us to also have a look at "the consideration of an appeal mechanism for Board decisions".

Third.  On this issue, our first recommendation is to ask a "committee of independent experts" to conduct a "broad, comprehensive assessment of the accountability and transparency of the existing mechanisms".   Doesn't this look odd?

We do say in the "findings" that we did not reach an agreement on some important points.   But we should have some more explicit language explaining that we are aware of the fact that we could not complete our mandate and that therefore somebody else should do it (and that had already been recommended in the past, see recommendation 2.7 etc.)

Fabio