[independent review] Pulling A Review Panel Together

[Mathieu Weill]

Hi all,

Great work and excellent discussion. Sorry if I'm late responding.

I subscribe to most comments and would add, on a personal basis, the 
following ones :
- regarding standard of review, should we not rather reference the 
mission / value / principles we are designing within WP2 ? I think this 
would cover both due process (section a on decision making procedures) 
and the scope of Icann's actions (section b). And it would add the 
option for the panel to decide on substance.
- regarding skillset, I would question whether technical skills are an 
absolute prerequisite. We also need to take into account that decisions 
may concern the addressing world as well ? The topics will also most 
probably involve the policy making function of Icann, so maybe extend to 
Internet identifiers technical and/or policy ?
- I would suggest some gender (always best for group efficiency) and 
language (for the cultural dimension it brings) diversity as well
- recall : the "community" body might be empowered, upon supermajority 
decision, to decide upon an "impeachment" procedure in the cases you 
mention ?

There is still refinement to be provided but I think we are making good 
progress !
Mathieu

Le 19/03/2015 17:27, Burr, Becky a écrit :
> I definitely agree on the no other role limitation, but I¹m not convinced
> on the re-appointment prohibition.  I suppose it depends on how
> comfortable we are with the nomination/confirmation process, no?
>
> J. Beckwith Burr
> Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer
> 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20006
> Office: + 1.202.533.2932  Mobile:  +1.202.352.6367  /
> becky.burr at neustar.biz / www.neustar.biz
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3/19/15, 12:20 PM, "Malcolm Hutty" <malcolm at linx.net> wrote:
>
>> One small suggestion: at the end of their term of office they should be
>> ineligible for re-appointment, or for appointment to the Board or other
>> office within ICANN.
>>
>> One of the greatest threats to independence (at least in environments
>> free of outright corruption) is the hope of re-appointment, or of
>> preferrment to another role, the latter often being justified on the
>> basis of the "outstanding expertise and experience" acquired in the
>> previous role.
>>
>> The most certain check on this threat would be permanence of office, but
>> as this is not appropriate in this case then a single could substitute.
>>
>> Malcolm.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wp2-independentreview mailing list
>> wp2-independentreview at icann.org
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mm.icann.org_mailman_
>> listinfo_wp2-2Dindependentreview&d=AwICAg&c=MOptNlVtIETeDALC_lULrw&r=62cJF
>> Oifzm6X_GRlaq8Mo8TjDmrxdYahOP8WDDkMr4k&m=1MPkU7Oy1y1MuhaFfvvuP_DG3ounxNZwr
>> ahiQgxpNY8&s=Ss8-qybz5QYJv_vEIBxtZMB9LgQKK8WAaehRdhP0cMI&e=
> _______________________________________________
> wp2-independentreview mailing list
> wp2-independentreview at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp2-independentreview

-- 
*****************************
Mathieu WEILL
AFNIC - directeur général
Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06
mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
Twitter : @mathieuweill
*****************************