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

[MSSI Secretariat]

Hi Cheryl – your apology will be noted, thank you.

Kind Regards,
Yvette Guigneaux
(MSSI) Multistakeholder Strategy & Strategic Initiatives
Projects & Operations Assistant.

ICANN – Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
Email:  yvette.guigneaux at icann.org
Cell:  +1-310-460-8432
Skype:  yvette.guigneaux.icann
www.icann.org<http://www.icann.org/>

[cid:image001.png at 01D32A97.36D91120]









From: ws2-ombudsman-bounces at icann.org [mailto:ws2-ombudsman-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Cheryl Langdon-Orr
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 11:08 PM
To: Bernard Turcotte <turcotte.bernard at gmail.com>; sebastien at bachollet.com
Cc: ws2-ombudsman at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ws2-ombudsman] CCWG-Accountability-WS2-Ombudsman-DrafRecommendationsV1.3.3

I am afraid I will be an apology for this call at 1300, right now, I simply can not manage three and four late night calls followed by 0300 starts at the moment... and obviously I would not need my usual dial out for the meeting.

Sorry, I have however note below a few minor points regarding the report, that I would have brought up if I was attending, I hope they can be considered and be of use in your deliberations.


  1.  Typo Page 4 Para 1, Line 2  "charge"  should read  'charged'.
  2.  Comment SB1; noting Phil Koury's comment regarding an 'ethics committee' and the Independent Examiners concept and motivations in proposing the Advisory Panel, I would suggest we leave our text as currently written as "Advisory Panel", we of course can make other adjustments and clarifications, if needs be, when discussing and or chartering such a panel.
  3.  Comment SB2; Have we as yet received this legal advice? I believe we would need to have this before further consideration of this point.
  4.  Comment SB3; Whilst I might debate and disagree with a number of the points Farzaneh has made on this matter, and recently reiterated under separate cover to the list, I do agree that the mechanism to review the employment contracts of the Ombuds Office staff is only one way the important matter of the Independence of the Office can and should be addressed, therefore I do agree with  the proposal to expand this section, but from the printed in PDF comment I can make no sense of the " ... .... ...." as written, however additional text that goes something like "9 - It is identified that there needs to be efforts made to improve the independence of the ICANN Ombuds Office. One mechanism for consideration to increase this independence is the consideration at this time of the revision of the Ombuds employment contracts to ... ... ... ... "
  5.  ?Format issue Page 22, Sec 3.0 => the bullet points in the second level indent list [o] are not a single list, this needs review/fixing I assume.
  6.   I am sure this will be added but we do need to have the Independent Examiners Report added to Appendix B.




Cheryl Langdon-Orr ...  (CLO)

about.me/cheryl.LangdonOrr





[about.me]


On 10 September 2017 at 23:40, 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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-ombudsman/attachments/20170911/75c01fb9/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2503 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ws2-ombudsman/attachments/20170911/75c01fb9/image001-0001.png>