[Wp3] Staff ACCT - Re: Final versions for approval

[Kieren McCarthy]

Something that may be useful in your discussions about staff accountability.

I have been digging into the unusual decision of ICANN's staff to redact
the final report of the IRP into the .Africa case.

This morning, I posted a second article on it in which highlights that
staff not only directly intervened in the process but then went to some
lengths to hide that fact. The response as to why it had done so was also
highly misleading.

More: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/24/icann_dot_africa


The key aspects in terms of accountability that concern me are:

* ICANN staff appeared to have consciously tried to avoid leaving a paper
trail of their interventions in what was supposed to be an independent
evaluation

* There are multiple layers of opaqueness built into the system designed to
ensure that staff's actions are never revealed - a significant one being
the independent evaluators are themselves under a confidentiality agreement
with ICANN the corporation (as opposed to the wider organization)

* When some details of staff actions did make it out through the final IRP
report, ICANN immediately sought to cover them up by redacting the report -
something it did despite the prevailing party specifically objecting

* ICANN staff is not afraid to use its unaccountability as a way to
pressure people into not revealing its wrongdoing. So in the .Africa case
for example, ICANN told DCA that it should not publish an unredacted
version of the final report without its approval: DCA of course is
completely reliant on ICANN to act on the report and to re-evaluate its
application


What also concerns me in that in many of these discussions, people have put
forward the argument that the ICANN Board should be mainly responsible for
looking into staff actions.

In this case in particular, despite staff action being highlighted as
unfair and discriminatory, and despite the staff then giving a misleading
account of its own actions, the Board has just to even suggest it may look
into events. In fact, I can't recall any occasion on which the ICANN Board
has decided to carry out its own investigation.

Plus of course in this case, the IRP found that the Board itself was also
culpable of not acting fairly or neutrally.

Just some things to bear in mind when deciding on the *limits* on staff
accountability that will inevitably form a part of the conversation.



Kieren




On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:07 AM, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía <
leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> wrote:

> Thanks Mathieu,
>
> I have edited the documento to accept your changes. I have also removed
> paragraph b) in the previous document as you are right and I have confirmed
> with Becky the the IRP is already applicable to Staff action or inaction.
>
> Attached the final version.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> León
>
> El 24/07/2015, a las 3:41, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>
> escribió:
>
>  Hi all,
>
> Regarding staff accountability this time :
>
>
> A couple of wording changes to facilitate insertion into the public
> comment report.
>
> I had the impression that IRP would already apply to Staff decisions, so
> maybe we should review that part of the recommendation ?
>
> Mathieu
>
> Le 24/07/2015 06:51, León Felipe Sánchez Ambía a écrit :
>
> Dear all,
>
> With apologies for the delay, attached you will find what I believe are the final versions of the three documents we’ve discussed.
>
> Please let me know if I missed anything or if I misrepresented our discussion.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> León
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wp3 mailing listwp3 at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp3
>
>
> --
> *****************************
> Mathieu WEILL
> AFNIC - directeur général
> Tél: +33 1 39 30 83 06mathieu.weill at afnic.fr
> Twitter : @mathieuweill
> *****************************
>
>  <StaffAccountability_Final-MW.docx>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wp3 mailing list
> wp3 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp3
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp3/attachments/20150724/3c5df67c/attachment.html>