[atrt2] Research reference to recommendations not being implemented WS1

Lise Fuhr lise.fuhr at difo.dk
Fri Aug 30 07:55:45 UTC 2013

Dear all,


According to our schedule for Proposed Observations or Recommendations for
Discussion, I should do research for recommendations not being implemented.
I have found the following remark from Adam Peake at our NomCom meeting in
Durban page 25 - 26 in the transcript:


"ADAM PEAKE: I'll ask my own question if I may. I'm interested to know how
you're looking at accountability and review. I know there has been a lot of
discussion about reconsideration and so on, but the part that interests me
from the bylaws there is how you're considering the periodic reviews that
should take place of the ICANN structures themselves. They don't seem to be
audited. The input doesn't seem to continue. I would think that would be
something that your committee might look at given the similarity in terms
that you have in your titles there. And the Nominating Committee is a good
example of that. There was a Nominating Committee [review?LFU]some years ago
and there has been very little implementation.


If you look at the GNSO review that happened where we saw a restructuring
into contracted and non-contracted parties, the delegates that come from the
GNSO to the Nominating Committee do not reflect the structure of the GNSO as
it currently exists.


So we have quite uncomfortable mismatches going on with what exists with the
reality of how the organization works and then how the Nominating Committee
reflects that, for example. And so we don't seem to have very much auditing
and processing of what happens with this rather important part of
accountability and review that is in the bylaws of ICANN. So I wonder if you
would like to take a look at that. Thanks."


Brian's answer:


"BRIAN CUTE: Just a quick response to Adam. One of the things we have to
deliver is a recommendation on the Affirmation of Commitments review process
itself. We want to make sure that this review process and the three that
precede it are improved going forward. In that light, we have heard some
comments to the effect that we need to be wary of the organization and not
reviewing itself to death. It's comments we've heard. So we're in listening
mode. I think those comments tie in to the point you raise about it might be
appropriate for this Review Team to look at the other review processes in
that broader light."


In order to shed more light on the issue one could contact Adam Peake and
ask which NomCom review that is not being implemented or audited.


It could also be a general recommendation that all reviews need to have a
follow up on implementation of recommendation.






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/atrt2/attachments/20130830/874eb911/attachment.html>

More information about the atrt2 mailing list