[CCWG-ACCT] TR: ST18 subgroup report Nov 23

[Mueller, Milton L]

I share Brett's concerns. In terms of compromise, as long as GAC retains its full consensus requirement for advice I am ok with requiring a 2/3 board majority to overturn it. 

However (related to the European proposal), I completely reject any solution which allows something to be called "GAC advice" if it does not have full consensus - even if it can be overturned by a bare majority of the board. The consideration of GAC advice constitutes a major commitment of time and has the potential to undermine or overthrow a painstaking consensus policy development process in the GNSO. GAC advice should therefore have to pass over a fairly high bar before it becomes a formal part of the policy development process. It cannot be just a majority or even a supermajority of governments (again I revert to the sovereignty issue which no one from the GAC has bothered to address.) The GAC should not under any circumstances be allowed to call a position "advice" if it does not have full consensus. 

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of
> Schaefer, Brett
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 4:58 PM
> To: Mathieu Weill
> Cc: Accountability Cross Community
> Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] TR: ST18 subgroup report Nov 23
> 
> I do not understand why this presents only the European GAC proposal and
> Thomas Rickert's proposal. This implies that these were the only two options
> discussed, which is far from correct. They were last minute attempts to find
> consensus in the group -- and failed to achieve it.
> 
> A substantial number of participants supported requiring a full consensus in
> support of GAC advice if it was to trigger the obligation to try an reach a
> mutually acceptable solution. The without substantial objection language is
> ambiguous in meaning and also fails to specify who would determine if a
> minority was substantial or not.
> 
> What if the GAC amends OP 47 to define a substantial minority as no more
> than 10 (or 5, 8, 15, whatever) governments? Would that be binding on the
> Board?
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> Brett Schaefer
> Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
> Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security
> and Foreign Policy The Heritage Foundation
> 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
> Washington, DC 20002
> 202-608-6097
> heritage.org<http://heritage.org/>
> 
> On Nov 23, 2015, at 11:44 AM, Mathieu Weill
> <mathieu.weill at afnic.fr<mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr>> wrote:
> 
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> Please find attached a report from the ST18 subgroup, for discussion during
> the CCWG call in about 12 hours. This is a co-chair summary, with options
> about which we will discuss in order to define our group’s way forward for
> the Draft Report.
> 
> I want to express my warmest appreciation and thanks to all the ST18
> subgroup colleagues who participated with great interest to our work, and
> especially to the colleagues who provided constructive inputs to these
> discussions.
> 
> Best
> Mathieu
> 
> De : Mathieu Weill [mailto:mathieu.weill at afnic.fr] Envoyé : lundi 23
> novembre 2015 18:39 À : s18 at icann.org<mailto:s18 at icann.org>
> Objet : ST18 subgroup report Nov 23
> 
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> Please find attached the (very summarized) report of our work that will be
> presented tomorrow in the CCWG. It will be circulated momentarily to the
> full group.
> 
> Thanks again for all the constructive and valuable inputs you have provided
> to advance this key item of our work.
> 
> Best,
> Mathieu
> <ST18 subgroup report Nov 23.pptx>
> <ST18 subgroup report Nov 23.pdf>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-
> Community at icann.org<mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-
> Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community