[CCWG-ACCT] Notes-Recordings-Transcript links for IRP Implementation Oversight Team (IOT) Meeting #1 - 14 January 2016
brenda.brewer at icann.org
Thu Jan 14 18:57:14 UTC 2016
The notes, recordings and transcripts for the IRP Implementation Oversight Team (IOT) Meeting #1 -
14 January 2016 will be available here: https://community.icann.org/x/WJllAw
A copy of the notes may be found below.
These high-level notes are designed to help you navigate through content of the call and do not
substitute in any way the transcript.
This should be a short call to cover functioning and scheduling.
We have received a draft of the Bylaws provisions which will be circulated to this group. This is a
first draft which will probably generate significant discussion and debate.
Probably best to go through this at a slightly later stage when other things begin to settle.
We should establish a standard weekly meeting time.
We should pick 2 consistent times for rotating calls.
Calls may be brief initially but it would be useful to keep to a weekly schedule.
Bylaws should address the basic operational practicalities. Instead of re-inventing the wheel we
could collect and distribute examples of how these issues have been addressed by others.
An eg. of this is rules of procedures of courts. The International Monetary Fund has an independent
review process which has many similar features to what we are looking to creating.
Would propose that institutions that have potentially useful rule books from which we could pick and
I have asked persons from different legal systems to get examples from different types of legal
Any suggestions on where we could look for this.
I have the World Bank,
(AC audio issues)
Jeff LeVee (Jones Day) - could be useful to reach out to lawyers who have participated in ICANN IRPs
in the past since there are only a few of these. Will be happy to provide input if requested.
BB - ICDR and ICANN supplementary rules should be added to consideration. Understanding that this is
more a constitutional court vs a straight commercial arbitration body and is very important to
participants. Simplicity should be the rule of the day. Good suggestion that attorneys who
participated in IRP proceedings should present to this group.
Jeff LeVee (Jones Day): The 3 lawyers who have been most active in representing claimants are: John
Genga (based in LA), Arif Ali (Dechert based in DC), and Flip Petillion (Crowell, based in
DM - for such a panel this would have to be managed very well to ensure we get what is needed - have
a set of questions.
MH - good idea, have to be intelligent how we do that, uncertain how well they will be tracking what
is going on in the CCWG - however it is a substantially different process - so it's not about tweaks
to the current process vs getting their views on our needs.
GS - We are the recommending body so we will have to assess what is presenting. But prepping them
properly would probably be useful. Another potential input is recent IRP decisions (.Africa).
BB - useful input. JL question - how about decision makers from the current IRP panels?
JL - that may work. I can recommend some names for this.
BB - for the call next week we will circulated the draft Bylaws and circulate some documentation
from various bodies. Participants should be assigned one the these each to analyze for their
BB - to what extent will participants be in Marrakech and if it makes sense to have a face to face
to face there? This is more exploration at this point. We should act only on real consensus and
there is no difference bet members and participants in this group.
BB - plan a meeting next week at the same time.
BB - important project and look forward to working with everyone.
Adjourned 18:38 UTC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 5035 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community