[CWG-Stewardship] Client Committee Update

[John Poole]

Kieren:
To respond to your posting referenced below--yes, the Client Committee was
self-appointed by the Co-Chairs as a closed group consisting of the two
Co-Chairs and the 2 attorneys who are members/participants of CWG. I had
volunteered to be a member, but I also understood the need for efficiency
and speed, therefore I do not consider it necessarily "precedent."

Unfortunately, we are month later, and CWG still has no independent legal
counsel, although I understand these things take "time." The extent of
ICANN staff  involvement with the Client Committee is of some concern--I
have heard Greg refer to it somewhat obliquely. I do not know the
specifics, but I do trust Greg Shatan's judgment in such matters--he
understands who the "client" is here--CWG-Stewardship--not ICANN, not ICANN
legal staff, etc.

So yes, we have a closed, self-appointed group of 4 deciding a critical
issue--
selection of independent legal counsel--in a somewhat opaque process up to
this point. I hope for a successful outcome, soon. Your request for
transparency was reasonable and I hope will be respected.

Best regards,
John Poole












*Kieren McCarthy kierenmccarthy at gmail.com
<cwg-stewardship%40icann.org?Subject=Re:%20Re%3A%20%5BCWG-Stewardship%5D%20Client%20Committee%20Update&In-Reply-To=%3CCAA4fB%3D1-BWXEzQNBCoKL6uwbCn3%3DEL-xpBgvbBK%2Bu9Rm9g3f3Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E>
Tue Feb 24 18:24:41 UTC 2015So far with this transition process, every
group has been open to all thosewho wish to join with an expectation of
participation.I would expect those same rules to apply here.It strikes me
that it would set a dangerous precedent if the chairs areallowed to create
a closed group at any time.Kieren*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20150224/47bea352/attachment.html>