[Ws2-ombudsman] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-DrafRecommendationsV1.3.3

[farzaneh badii]

Hi All,

I wanted to attend the call tomorrow but Irma is getting closer to Atlanta
and I am not sure what the situation will be regarding power/Internet.

In any case, I apologize for not being able to attend and I hope that you
consider my comments or at least give me a chance to explain the comments
in another meeting.

Best

Farzaneh

Farzaneh

On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 11:34 AM, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thank you Bernie,
>
> I would like to reiterate my comments in this thread with the hope that my
> comments be considered.
>
> I think we need to add to our recommendations.  The report says based on
> the survey that it was carried out the ombuds function
>
> • does not however meet all expectations, with a number feeling that it
> does not
> ​ ​
> have enough *power or independence*
>
>
>  As I have argued a number of times, giving the ombuds person a 5 year
> contract does not add to their independence! At the moment the ombuds
> office is designed in a way that the source of ombuds income is only
> through an ICANN contract. The length of this contract does not really make
> any difference in the independence of ombuds. As long as the employees only
> source of income is the ICANN contract they might not be in a  vacuum where
> economic incentives don't play a role.
>
> We
> ​ ​
> need more
> ​ ​
> recommendations
> ​ ​
> for maintaining independence. So I am going to suggest the group to
> consider the following:
>
> - The ombuds office should be an office and not a person meaning that it
> should be either an external organization that can carry out the task or an
> office more than two employees.
>
> - The employees of ombuds office should not mingle and socialize with the
> members of ICANN community nor with the board.
>
> - Preferably the ombuds office source of revenue should not be solely
> reliant on ICANN contact
>
>
> As to the lack of power of ombuds, I think we need to highlight which
> recommendations can overcome the power problem. While I understand that it
> is difficult because ombuds decisions should not be binding, we should
> first of all clarify what we mean by nonbinding nature of ombuds decision:
> does it mean no legal enforcement or no enforcement within the
> organization? I believe it's both. But this is not clear in the documents.
> If it's both then we need to have other measures in place to empower the
> ombuds office. I don't think this is a procedural/ implementation matter. I
> think this should be discussed at this group and we should at least
> recommend that the nature of ombuds decisions (whether binding in its
> organizational sense) should be clarified. (this can be added to
> recommendation 2)
>
> Recommendation 2 also
>
> explains that:
> "
> Set out the kinds of matters where the Ombuds will usually not intervene –
> and
> ​ ​
> where these matters are likely to be referred with the complainant’s
> permission;
> "
>
> T
> his is a good recommendation and prevents ombuds office from arbitrarily
> refusing to do something about a complaint. But we should also recommend
> that the ombuds office should transparently explain why it has not accepted
> certain cases or why it has not done anything about them. This should be
> done considering the confidential nature of the process of ombuds but this
> confidential nature should not enable the office to arbitrarily reject
> complaints.
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Bernard Turcotte <
> turcotte.bernard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> Sebastien has asked that I forward the draft of the report (attached) for
>> consideration at the next meeting of the Ombuds sub-group meeting scheduled
>> for 1300UTC Monday 11 September.
>>
>> Bernard Turcotte
>> ICANN Staff Support to the CCWG-Accountability-WS2
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ws2-ombudsman mailing list
>> Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-ombudsman/attachments/20170911/a891305d/attachment-0001.html>