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

[Sebicann Bachollet]

Hello Farzaneh,
I hope you are in a safe place.
If you are not able to attend the meeting we will note your apology.

Regarding your comments, as the comments from all other, will be consider.
We wil review our timeline but I am sure that we wil be able to discuss the comments during next week meeting - 2017 Septembre 18th at 5:00am UTC.

Take care.
All the best
SeB

> Le 11 sept. 2017 à 06:06, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> 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 <mailto: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;"
> 
> This 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 <mailto: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 <mailto:Ws2-ombudsman at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ws2-ombudsman>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/ea2246aa/attachment-0001.html>