<div dir="ltr">Hi,<div>in relation with comments related with GAC:</div><div><ul style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><li style="margin-left:15px"><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">The GAC Chair is part of the Board but has a non voting seat</span></li></ul><ul style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><li style="margin-left:15px">There is no participation of the GAC in Nomcom for the moment, and there is no decision on how this will be in the future</li><li style="margin-left:15px"><br></li><li style="margin-left:15px">GAC is an Advisory Committee to the ICANN board</li></ul><div><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Carlos, please clarify your question: "T</span><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">he GAC has in general the same weight as all SO/ACs, or doesn’t it?"</span></div></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Best regards</span></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">Olga</span></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2015-02-17 4:23 GMT-03:00 Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:crg@isoc-cr.org" target="_blank">crg@isoc-cr.org</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><u>Re: #18 Stress of GAC Consensus advice</u><div><br></div><div>Dear Steve,</div><div><br></div><div>With the hindsight of the call, your example reminds me of the .wine and .vin case. so it goes beyond a theoretical test.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div>a) I think the case you are discussing is a question of the different layers of representation (all under accountability of course)</div></blockquote><div><ul><ul><li>The GAC has representation at the Board level</li><li>The GAC has more or less representation at the NomCom level, depending on recent proposal</li><li>The GAC has earlier engagement at the policy level and late advice at the Board level</li><li>The GAC has in general the same weight as all SO/ACs, or doesn’t it?</li></ul></ul></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div>b) the we are talking about there internal rules</div></div></blockquote><div><ul><ul><li>Their bylaws about <b>consensus</b> decision making</li></ul></ul><div><br></div></div><div><br></div><div><div>In the .wine and .vin case there was no consensus.</div></div><div>I have problems in using such specific cases of stress cases under general “accountability” title and try to solve it just by changes in the bylaws. I think it needs a little bit more structural analysis <b>if <u>all SO/ACs have the same weight (consensus based or not)</u> at all levels,in all processes, at all times or not</b>. I f we just start limiting how to change internal issues in the GAC we might face larger inconsistencies further down the road.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Carlos Raul Gutierrez</div><div>GNSO Council</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="h5"><div>On Feb 16, 2015, at 2:42 PM, Steve DelBianco <<a href="mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org" target="_blank">sdelbianco@netchoice.org</a>> wrote:</div><br></div></div><div><div><div class="h5">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div>
<div>
<div><font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Cheryl — attached is an updated version 4 of our stress test document. Give it a look and you may decide it’s worth circulating before our call Tuesday. </font></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif">First, I made the updates that came up during our working session Thursday morning in Singapore. </font></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif">Second, I added application of stress test #18 in Category IV (see page 3). This is a stress test regarding GAC Advice:</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<font face="Calibri,sans-serif">
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px" type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>18. Governments in ICANN’s Government Advisory Committee (GAC) amend their operating procedures to change from consensus decisions to majority voting for advice to ICANN’s board. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Consequence: Under current bylaws, ICANN must consider and respond to GAC advice, even if that advice were not supported by consensus. A majority of governments could thereby approve GAC advice that restricted free online expression, for example.</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px" type="cite">
<div>Existing Accountability Measures:</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px" type="cite">
<div>Current ICANN Bylaws (Section XI) give due deference to GAC advice, including a requirement to try and find “a mutually acceptable solution.”</div>
<div> </div>
<div>This is required for any GAC advice, not just for GAC consensus advice.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Today, GAC adopts formal advice according to its Operating Principle 47: “consensus is understood to mean the practice of adopting decisions by general agreement in the absence of any formal objection.” But the GAC may at any time change its procedures
to use majority voting instead of consensus.</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px" type="cite">
<div>CCWG Proposed Accountability Measures:</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px" type="cite">
<div>One proposed measure is to give the community standing to veto a board decision. If ICANN board acquiesced to GAC advice that was not supported by GAC consensus, the community veto could enable reversal of that decision.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Another proposed measure is to amend ICANN bylaws (Section XI 1j) to give due deference only to GAC consensus advice, and add a definition of “consensus”.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The GAC could change its Operating Principle 47 to use majority voting for formal GAC advice, but ICANN bylaws would require due deference only to advice that had GAC consensus. </div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
Best,</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
Steve</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<div>
<div>
<div>—</div>
<div>
<div>Steve DelBianco</div>
<div>Executive Director</div>
<div>NetChoice</div>
<div><a href="http://www.netchoice.org/" target="_blank">http://www.NetChoice.org</a> and <a href="http://blog.netchoice.org/" target="_blank">http://blog.netchoice.org</a></div>
<div>+1.703.615.6206</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div><span><Applying Stress Tests [Draft v4].pdf></span><span><Applying Stress Tests [Draft v4].docx></span>_______________________________________________<br>Ccwg-accountability4 mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ccwg-accountability4@icann.org" target="_blank">Ccwg-accountability4@icann.org</a><br><a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability4" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability4</a><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Ccwg-accountability4 mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ccwg-accountability4@icann.org">Ccwg-accountability4@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability4" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability4</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>