[CCWG-ACCT] ICANN Board comments on Recommendation 9 – AoC Reviews
Bruce.Tonkin at melbourneit.com.au
Thu Feb 4 07:40:13 UTC 2016
Recommendation 9 – AoC Reviews
Following on from the recent email exchange to clarify the Board’s concerns on Recommendation 9, the Board notes that many of its concerns can be addressed during implementation and the development of Operational Standards. The Board has a particular concern with two paragraphs in the most recent version.
At paragraph 54, the Board does not support the language that states “Review Teams are established to include both a limited number of members and an open number of participants.” The Board would support this language if it read “Review Teams are established to include both a limited number of members and an open number of observers.” The Board does not agree with a Bylaws-mandated inclusion of “participants” in these Review Teams. The Review Team composition is defined and limited because of the specificity of the review. Requiring open participation is not consistent with this purpose.
Similarly, the statement at Paragraph 57 that the Review Team would first try to find consensus among “participants”, and only if that is not successful, seek consensus among members. Consensus polling should only be among the Review Team members. The Board does not support maintaining “if consensus cannot be reached among the participants” at the beginning of that paragraph.
ICANN Board Liaison to the CCWG
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community