[WP1] Bylaws powers distinction

[Jordan Carter]

Dear all, Kavouss:

On 16 April 2015 at 23:16, Kavouss Arasteh <kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Pls kindly provide today,s adgenda in itemized fashion in hyperlinking the
> corresponding doc.s
>

This was done on time, and I have just recirculated it.


> Dear Jordan,
> Pls note that I was not give a convincing answer why the title of
> Fundamental Bylaws changes is different from gthat of Bylaws changes
> They must be consistent
>

No. One is an after the fact power to reject a change. The fundamental
bylaws change process is a co-decision process with the Board. They are
different and they are both important. They are not the same and that is
why they are not worded to pretend they are the same.


> Your agrument is not legally valid .
>

You are wrong on this point. The approach is legally valid, as if it was
not, the lawyers would have identified this in their advice. You are
entitled to disagree with it but it is not reasonable for you to define
something as unlawful when you are not a lawyer.

This is a specific question we could raise with them, for answering on CCWG
next week.


> Changes are changes the only difference is that for fundamental changes
> you need a very high threshold
> Moreover, as I understood for change to the Bylaws , it is the ICANN Board
> who may inititae  that action..Why not the so/ac/sg or community should not
> have such possibility?
>

We discussed this on the call yesterday - I would ask Greg to recap.

>
>  For change of fundamental Bylaws who could take initiative?
> Board or SO/AC/SG or.....
>

The process for change is being prepared by WP2.


> As for the threshold , I indicated some threshold , you asked me where
> they came from. They come from customary laws and international practice,
> there are many treaties, covenants, charters, constitutions, parlimentary
> approach they all use the following
> Simple majority 50+1
> Supermajority 2/3
> Supermajority 3/4
> Supermajarity 4/5
> There has never been any other arbitrary figure like 20% 40% 60%
> Please note that we are living in a world with considerable precedence and
> practice
> We should not have new invention on legal matter
> Regards
> Kavouss
>
>
>
best
Jordan

-- 
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
*InternetNZ*

04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
jordan at internetnz.net.nz
Skype: jordancarter

*A better world through a better Internet *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150417/1a5a4b29/attachment.html>