[CCWG-ACCT] (no subject)

Kavouss Arasteh kavouss.arasteh at gmail.com
Wed Feb 3 21:56:34 UTC 2016

*Dear Esteemed and respectful  CCWG Colleagues*

*First of all, allow me to share the following thought with you: We are in
a crucial time for the CCWG requiring to act in a coordinated  manner  on
the upcoming Devoted Calls with the aim of assisting the CCWG  in
finalizing Recommendation 11,including some adjustments in Recommendation 1
 which enable CCWG to assemble the Supplementary Report. This Report needs
to be  issued  well in advance of the Marrakech meeting if the overall
timeline for IANA stewardship transition is to be maintained. Given that
the CCWG is working hard to agree a compromise in the current round of
virtual meetings,*

*I wish to reiterate what I mentioned at various occasions that we need to
be pragmatic and tolerable, to be more open to any possible set of solution
with a view to find a compromise and not merely insist on the wishes,
requirements and expectations of every single SO and AC but on the contrary
make utmost efforts to satisfy ,to the extent practiceable and possible
 the entire community.*

*We are aware of the sensitive elements of Recommendation 1 as well as
those of Recommendation 11*

*We have made considerable progress to almost bring the views of the
interested parties together.*

*However, there are some more bits to be done. In ICT network connection,
the Last kilometer or perhaps last hundred meters of the connection  are
sometimes more complex to  compared with the entire network to provide an
overall inclusive connection.*

*We have succeeded to find workable solutions for many of these last
kilometers in various area .It remains to finish that last kilometer which
located in a rocky and mountainous area  *

*We need to also make out utmost effort to move forward from our current
position which is different from each other and not rule out compromise as
a backward step. Our role  is to make concession towards each other
position  .We need to take every possible initiative to move forward to
 timely complete this proposal on enhanced accountability. *

*Frankly speaking and from a professional view point, and as a participant
of CCWG and Liaison of ICG to CCWG, I think we should really be more open,
constructively, objectively and efficiently*

*To this effect , I wish to suggest a package deal which needs to be
accepted or rejected as a whole without being disintegrated/ decomposed .*

*The Pack Deal is simple straightforward and practical*

   1. *Modify Recommendation 1 to add the language as proposed  by Beckie*
   2. *Maintain the rest of Recommendation 1 Unchanged*
   3. *Accept the 60% threshold for GAC advice ,if to be rejected by the
   4. *Maintain the rest of Recommendation  11 Unchanged*
   5. *No other  discussion ,what so ever, on these two Recommendation*
   6. *Submit the Package Deal to the forthcoming CCWG scheduled to be held
   on 09 February with a note from Beckie indicating that this is a delicate
   balance ,a sensitive compromise and recommend to the CCWG to take it as it

*I have no intention of being presumptuous about this, and you are of
course entirely free to reject my suggestions.  Please note that my
proposal requires a change to Recommendation 1 and a conforming change to
Recommendation 2.  To be consistent with our standard procedures, I suggest
we conduct 1rst final readings of the compromise during our Dedicated Rec
11 calls (scheduled for 4 Feb and 8 Feb) and the 2nd final reading during
our regular call on 9 Feb.  Please note that I have also included Malcolm’s
requested clarification regarding no changes with respect to presumptions
or standard of review.  I do not believe that this text is strictly
necessary, but in the interests of getting everyone on board I think it
makes sense to include it.  *

*Package Deal*

*1. Modify Rec #1/Annex 1 and Rec #2/Annex 2*

*·      Add the following to the end of Paragraph 23 in Rec #1/Annex 1:  *

*The GAC may not, however, participate as a decision maker in the Empowered
Community’s consideration of the exercise a community power for the purpose
of challenging or blocking the Board’s implementation of GAC Advice. In
such cases, the GAC remains free to participate in community deliberations
in an advisory capacity, but its views will not count towards or against
otherwise agreed thresholds needed to initiate a conference call, convene a
Community Forum, or exercise a specific Community Power.  This carve out
preserves the ICANN Board’s unique obligation to work with the GAC try to
find a mutually acceptable solution to implementation of GAC Advice
supported by consensus (as defined in Rec. #11) while protecting the
community’s power to challenge such Board decisions.*

*·      Modify the Table in Rec. #2/Annex 2 to reflect this carve out and
add the following language to cover situations that would otherwise require
the support of four SOs or ACs:*

*The CCWG-Accountability also recommends that in a situation where the GAC
may not participate as a Decisional AC because the community power is
proposed to be used to challenge the Board’s implementation of GAC Advice
and the threshold is set at four in support, the power will still be
validly exercised if three are in support and no more than one objects.  *

*2.   Modify Recommendation 11 to reflect 60% threshold for rejection of
GAC advice by Board, with note to drafters that supermajority requirement
is not intended to create any presumption or modify the standard applied by
the Board in reviewing GAC Advice.  *

*3. During dedicated Recommendation 11 meetings (4 February and 8 February)

*·      Discuss and accept Recommendation 1 with change described above as
first final reading; *

*·      Discuss and accept Recommendation 2 with change described above as
first final reading; and*

*·      Discuss and accept Recommendation 11 with changes described above
as first final reading. *

*4.   Submit the package deal to the CCWG for final consideration (2nd
final reading) at its conference call scheduled for 9 February, noting
delicate balance requiring compromise on all sides to reach consensus and
recommending adoption “as is” (assuming consensus on Dedicated
Recommendation 11 calls).  *

* Kavouss *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20160203/ff0d9bf3/attachment.html>

More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list