[CCWG-ACCT] Regarding a standing panel for the independent review of Board actions

[Bruce Tonkin]

Hello Seun,

>>  - Is there a documented reference (perhaps minutes) indicating that board indeed approved the creation and are those documents public?

The relevant Board resolutions documented at (thanks to Alan Greenberg for the reference):

https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2013-04-11-en#1.d 


a. Whereas, the Accountability and Transparency Review Team's Recommendations 23 and 25 recommended that ICANN retain independent experts to review ICANN's accountability structures and the historical work performed on those structures.

Whereas, ICANN convened the Accountability Structures Expert Panel (ASEP), comprised of three international experts on issues of corporate governance, accountability and international dispute resolution, which after research and review of ICANN's Reconsideration and Independent Review processes and multiple opportunities for public input, produced a report in October 2012.

Whereas, the ASEP report was posted for public comment, along with proposed Bylaws revisions to address the recommendations within the report.

Whereas, after ASEP and Board review and consideration of the public comment received, on 20 December 2012 the Board approved Bylaws revision to give effect to the ASEP's recommendations, and directed additional implementation work to be followed by a staff recommendation for the effective date if the revised Bylaws.

Whereas, as contemplated within the Board resolution, and as reflected in public comment, further minor revisions are needed to the Bylaws to provide flexibility in the composition of a standing panel for the Independent Review process (IRP).
Resolved (2013.04.11.06), the Bylaws revisions to Article IV, Section 2 (Reconsideration) and Article IV, Section 3 (Independent Review) as approved by the Board and subject to a minor amendment to address public comments regarding the composition of a standing panel for the IRP, shall be effective on 11 April 2013.


Rationale for Resolution 2013.04.11.06

The Board's action in accepting the report of the Accountability Structures Expert Panel (ASEP) and approving the attendant Bylaws revisions is in furtherance of the Board's commitment to act on the recommendations of the Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT). The ASEP's work was called for in ATRT Recommendations 23 and 25, and the work performed, including a review of the recommendations from the President's Strategy Committee's work on Improving Institutional Confidence, is directly aligned with the ATRT requested review.

The adoption of the ASEP's work represents a great stride in ICANN's commitment to accountability to its community. The revised mechanisms adopted today will bring easier access to the Reconsideration and Independent Review processes through the implementation of forms, the institution of defined terms to eliminate vagueness, and the ability to bring collective requests.   A new ground for Reconsideration is being added, which will enhance the ability for the community to seek to hold the Board accountable for its decisions.   The revisions are geared towards instituting more predictability into the processes, and certainty in ICANN's decision making, while at the same time making it clearer when a decision is capable of being reviewed.   The Bylaws as further revised also address a potential area of concern raised by the community during the public comments on this issue, regarding the ability for ICANN to maintain a standing panel for the Independent Review proceedings.   If a standing panel cannot be comprised, or cannot remain comprised, the Bylaws now allow for Independent Review proceedings to go forward with individually selected panelists.

The adoption of these recommendations will have a fiscal impact on ICANN, in that there are anticipated costs associated with maintaining a Chair of the standing panel for the Independent Review process and potential costs to retain other members of the panel. However, the recommendations are expected to result in less costly and time-consuming proceedings, which will be positive for ICANN, the community, and those seeking review under these accountability structures.   The outcomes of this work are expected to have positive impacts on ICANN and the community in enhanced availability of accountability mechanisms. This decision is not expected to have any impact on the security, stability or resiliency of the DNS.

This is an Organizational Administrative Function of the Board for which the Board received public comment.