[CCWG-ACCT] Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for CCWG ACCT Session #14 24 February

[Brenda Brewer]

Dear all, 

 

The notes, recordings and transcripts for the CCWG ACCT Session #14 call on 24 February will be
available here:  https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=52889476

 


Action Items


ACTION ITEM: Becky Burr and Kavouss Arasteh to further discuss offline

ACTION ITEM: Jonathan Zuck to suggest how we could change format 

ACTION ITEM: Legal subteam to review and refine questions and determine whether WS1/WS2


Notes


1. Statement of interest to be uploaded/updated - contact staff if help needed

2.  Activity report from Work Parties

WP 1 

- WP1 has developed a draft work plan, has agreed on working methods, is working with an aggressive
deadline and plans to deliver WP output by March 11. 

- Volunteers are developing templates for each power and mechanism. Current gaps will be picked up.
Editors will review content.

- Triggered and non triggered categorization has been applied to items in paper, resulting in an
initial allocation between two Working parties. WP1 is awaiting WP2 feedback to allocate tasks.

- WP1 has structured mechanisms around powers and finds the accountability mechanism template
challenging in some ways: some questions are more relevant to mechanisms and vice-versa. It
envisions to produce recommendations on how to improve it. It was commented that questions would not
have same relevance to both categorizations and will be reviewed and addressed as progress is made. 

- It was observed that a mechanism gives structure to power and there is need for a procedure and
vehicle to support the power. Threshold (consensus/full consensus) also comes into play. 

- The recommendation is to commence with the analysis of powers and to attach them with mechanisms.

- The WP1 walked the CCWG through proposed Bylaws additions on amending ICANN Bylaws to incorporate
AOC reviews. The text is merged with periodic structural reviews text that currently exists in
Bylaws. Edits to the AoC review process were also suggested. Feedback to suggestions included:
should Bylaws give a prescriptive headcount? Stakeholder Groups being subordinates to a structure,
is it really necessary to include them? ; It is important to reflect diversity and balance; While
support for selections made by SO/ACs, lack of diversity was flagged as a downside and an aspect
that could be preserved through selectors; Specifics may change in the future. With the objective of
stable Bylaws, consider high level principles that can be included in the Bylaws instead, along with
a reference to an external document where specifics would be given. In this approach a very high
threshold on ability to change that document would be added; A Bylaws categorization  was proposed:
1) fundamental and constitutional provisions (stable); 2 functional and operation (less stable); 3)
rules relations to elections etc; consider more lengthy timelines.

- No decision will be made on the call. 

---

WP2

- WP2 has produced a revised scoping document to reflect changes and results of WP 1 work on
triggered and non-triggered. Scoping documents for WP1 and WP2 are harmonized.

- Close coordination with WP 1 is needed.

- A work plan and working methods (based on WP1 modus operandi) has been circulated. Standards of
work will be discussed. 

- WP2 plans to have a document available by face-to-face meeting (17 March tentatively)

---

ST-WP

- ST-WP wrapped up presentation of  stress test 18 (If GAC changes operating procedures from
consensus to majority voting). A contributor suggested looking into the preliminary injunction (IRP)
regarding delegation of Persian and noted absence of GAC advice and a group of GAC members invoking
IRP. Objections were raised by another contributor i.e. outside CCWG mandate and references made to
the South Africa communiqué.

ACTION ITEM: Becky Burr and Kavouss Arasteh to further discuss offline

- ST-WP walked the group through  stress test 17 (ICANN adds a new TLD in spite of SSR concerns).
Feedback included: What is our definition of success within context of stress tests?; Stress tests
are going to be measures of degrees -t say yes/no answers will be rare. 

- No decision will be made on the call. 

ACTION ITEM: Jonathan Zuck to suggest how we could change format 

 

3. Legal Subteam Update

- Questions have been suggested and the Subteam is awaiting questions from WP1 and WP2.

- Robin is working on framing questions into a letter that can be delivered to law firm that will be
selected. Background and context will be included.

- Call with final list of law firms will be held.  Update on final candidate that will be put
forward for hiring by ICANN will be shared asap. 

- Questions are divided into 3 categories: 1) corporate governance; 2)jurisdictional matters; 3)
protection of ICANN, antitrust and other law suits.

- Given concerns about ccTLD delegation and redelegations remedies (e.g. dispute resolution),
feedback is needed.

- Feedback included: formulate questions to be list of powers and ask for mechanisms that can
accomplish powers as opposed to putting mechanisms up; frame questions using how to trigger response
(as opposed to yes/no); lawyers need to know what our requirements are so that can advise what
empowerment can be implemented. In context of jurisdictional: global survey of jurisdiction can take
ages and cost a fortune; changing jurisdiction will make transition impossible: the group needs to
decide if these questions are for WS1; Keep jurisdictional issues open: are there any arbitration or
international panel can go to for jurisdictional issues, is there a way to get step into resolution
with something simpler to begin with; Jurisdiction might be too complicated, keep it simple (recall
Board, Independent Appeals mechanism etc).  

ACTION ITEM: Legal subteam to review and refine questions and determine whether WS1/WS2 

 

4. F2F meeting

- Confirmed for 23-24 March 2015 at Hilton Istanbul Bomonti Hotel & Conference Center.

- Agenda will be circulated in time.

- Discussing May F2F meeting in coordination with CWG-stewardship leadership.

 

5. A.O.B 

The CCWG discussed removal of individual Board members with a note that architecture needs to be
revisited if allowing for entire Board or individual Board. Feedback includes:

- Current Bylaws allow that Board can dismiss individual board members if CoI. Individual removal
might lead to unhealthy environment, create a witch hunt. 

- Be careful to not penalize whole group if one group is concerned.

- Spilling of Board is a nuclear option and disruptive step. We are seeking incremental,
implementable ways to challenge Board decision. The community does not have anybody that represents
their interest. We need ability to override and challenge decision.

- Board members are appointed because they share a mindset – if not in line with mindset, should be
able to remove this Board member.  There is also the case of NomCom appointed members: ability to
remove them is needed.  Significant consensus among SO/ACs would be needed – the member would be
removed for serious reasons. On the other hand, removal of entire Board is a whole set of issues
(interim etc).

- A mechanism is needed for the three above: spilling entire board is not disruptive as long as
there is a defined method; spilling an individual Board members is a SG/C decision, not a community
decision to make. Recall mechanism within process defined for NomCom would take a lot more time.
Vote of non-confidence on the Board or all the other need to be in WS1.

- Predictability and stability is important: recall of Board members will undermine
predictability/stability. Consider reducing term and don't reelect.

- Recall Board members if not acting in global public interest rather than if not acting in
segmented interest of a community. Consider community capture (especially a segment of community).

- We should not allow community removal of one Board member in particular – must come from the
concerned community.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150225/3c69bff8/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150225/3c69bff8/image001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150225/3c69bff8/smime.p7s>