[CWG-Stewardship] Sidley's Draft CWG Comment Letter on CCWG Final Proposal for review

[Lise Fuhr]

Dear All,

Last Friday the 12th February we sent you an update on process and timing regarding our work on the CWG Stewardship Dependency on CCWG Accountability.

Sidley has, as the CWG agreed, updated our response to CCWG to reflect the changes that have since been made in the Supplementary Proposal. Below is the email from Sidley which also addresses areas that the CWG should be aware of.

We now need you to review this response and give any feedback immediately and no later than 23h59 UTC on Tuesday 23 February.

We will then ensure that the final response is communicated to the CCWG, the Chartering Organisations and, of course, the ICG on or around 24 February.

Any concerns, questions or issues arising, please let us know ASAP.

Jonathan & Lise
CWG Stewardship Co-Chairs


From: cwg-client-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-client-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Flanagan, Sharon
Sent: 19 February 2016 22:57
To: Client Committee
Subject: [client com] Draft CWG Comment Letter on CCWG Final Proposal

Dear All,

Attached please find a draft of the CWG letter to the CCWG regarding the CCWG Supplemental Final Proposal.

As noted in our prior email, with respect to the CWG dependency for an empowered community there was a request in the prior CWG comment letter for CCWG to consider whether the timelines in the prior CCWG proposal for SO/AC action were sufficiently long.  The revised CCWG proposal has extended some of these timelines.  As noted in our prior email, while this is not strictly an issue of conformity with the CWG proposal as the CWG proposal does not address this type of detail, we wanted to confirm that CWG was satisfied with the response to its prior comment letter.

Please also note that the community power to recall the entire ICANN Board is modified when the Board is to be recalled for implementing GAC advice.  Specifically, if the Empowered Community initiates an IRP challenging the Board’s implementation of GAC advice as being inconsistent with the ICANN Bylaws but does not prevail in the IRP, the Empowered Community may not exercise its power to recall the entire Board solely on the basis of the matter decided by the IRP. The Empowered Community may, however, exercise the power to recall the entire Board based on other grounds.  We don’t believe this directly impacts the CWG dependency, but we did want to note it.

Please let us know if you have any questions or would like to discuss.

Kind regards,
Holly and Sharon

SHARON R. FLANAGAN
Partner

SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
www.sidley.com<http://www.sidley.com>
[Image removed by sender. SIDLEY]





****************************************************************************************************
This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us
immediately.

****************************************************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160220/95fec848/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 416 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160220/95fec848/image001-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CWG Comment Letter - CCWG Final Proposal - Sidley Draft-213202714-v3.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 37075 bytes
Desc: CWG Comment Letter - CCWG Final Proposal - Sidley Draft-213202714-v3.docx
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cwg-stewardship/attachments/20160220/95fec848/CWGCommentLetter-CCWGFinalProposal-SidleyDraft-213202714-v3-0001.docx>